Cheque bounce case - Sec.219 of Cr.P.C. - Conslidation of proceedings = Whether four cheque bounce cases of which single notice was given cases had been heard together or separately, they would have been decided by now only because of the interim proceedings, even the evidence has not been recorded. The main ground raised is that in terms of Section 219 of the Code of Criminal Procedure since the offences took place during the period of one year, the cases should be dealt together. Even if Section 219 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was to apply, there have to be two trials because not more than three cases can be tried together even if they occurred in one year. The only other contention is that since one notice has been issued, four separate trials should not take place and one trial should take place. There is no provision of consolidation of cases in the Code of Criminal Procedure. The only relief that can be granted to the appellant is that we direct the Trial Magistrate to fix all the four cases on one date so that it is convenient to both the parties to attend the hearing of all the four cases on one date.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S).587-590 OF 2010
VANI AGRO ENTERPRISES                    APPELLANT(S)
                             VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.                    RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R
The appellant herein is alleged to have issued four
cheques   to   the   respondent   no.2   which   allegedly   bounced.
The   respondent   no.2   sent   one   notice   in   terms   of   Section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments At, 1881 with regard to
bouncing   of   all   the   four   cheques.   Thereafter,   complaints
were   filed   in   the   year   1999   and   these   complaints   have
dragged   on   for   20   years   only   on   the   application   of   the
appellant   herein   that   all   the   four   complaints   should   be
consolidated and heard together.
Whether   these   cases   had   been   heard   together   or
separately,   they   would   have   been   decided   by   now   only
because of the interim proceedings, even the evidence has
1

not been recorded. 
The   main   ground   raised   is   that   in   terms   of   Section
219  of   the  Code   of  Criminal   Procedure  since   the  offences
took   place   during   the   period   of   one   year,   the   cases
should be dealt together. Even if Section 219 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure was to apply, there have to be two
trials   because   not   more   than   three   cases   can   be   tried
together even if they occurred in one year. 
The   only   other   contention   is   that   since   one   notice
has   been   issued,   four   separate   trials   should   not   take
place   and   one   trial   should   take   place.   There   is   no
provision   of   consolidation   of   cases   in   the   Code   of
Criminal Procedure. 
The   only   relief   that   can   be   granted   to   the
appellant   is   that   we   direct   the   Trial   Magistrate   to   fix
all   the   four   cases   on   one   date   so   that   it   is   convenient
to both the parties to attend the hearing of all the four
cases on one date.  
It   shall   be   open   to   the   trial   Court   to   record   the
evidence  in   the  manner   it  feels   like.  Since   the  original
complaints   were   filed   in   the   year   1999,   we   direct   the
2

Magistrate   to   fix   day   to   day   hearing   in   the   matters   and
dispose of these complaints latest by 31.12.2019.
In terms of the above, the appeals are disposed of.
   
...................J.
 (DEEPAK GUPTA)
...................J.
 (ANIRUDDHA BOSE)
New Delhi
September 05, 2019
3

ITEM NO.105               COURT NO.13               SECTION II-B
               S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No(s).587-590/2010
VANI AGRO ENTERPRISES                              Appellant(s)
                                VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.                         Respondent(s)
Date : 05-09-2019 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE
For Appellant(s)
Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv.
Ms. Sucheta Joshi, Adv.
Mr. Ankit Seth, Adv.
Ms. Himadri Haksar, Adv.
Ms. Minakshi Vij, AOR
                 
For Respondent(s)
                    Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, AOR
Mr. A. Rajarajan, ADv.
Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Choudhary, Adv.
Mr. Gurkamal Hora, Adv.
Mr. Gagan Gupta, AOR
                   
          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                             O R D E R
The appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed order,
Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(ARJUN BISHT)                                   (RENU KAPOOR)
COURT MASTER (SH)                               BRANCH OFFICER
4