Cheque bounce case and counter case under Sec.420 of IPC are to be tried together by the same officer.
Essentially, there are two criminal proceedings. On 1 November 2013, the petitioners filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 of which the JMFC took cognizance on 12 February 2014. It appears that on 22 August 2014, the respondent has filed a complaint before the JMFC under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 against the petitioners. Cognizance has been taken on 21 May 2015.
Having regard to the common factual background in both the criminal cases, we are of the view that both the complaint filed by the petitioners and the complaint filed by the respondent should be tried by one and the same Judge.
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Appeal No 40 of 2021
(Arising out of SLP (Crl) No 5142 of 2020)
Pitambar Lokwani & Anr .... Appellant(s)
Versus
Deepak Rao Khatke ....Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1 Leave granted.
2 While issuing notice in the present proceedings on 15 October 2020, the
following order was passed:
“Mr Shishir Kumar Saxena, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioners states that the petitioners have filed a
complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
1881 on 1 November 2013, which is pending trial. Learned
counsel submits that the complaint which has been filed by the
respondent before the JMFC under Section 420 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code arises out of the same
cheque of Rs 4,60,000, which forms the subject matter of the
complaint under Section 138. He submits that the complaint
which has been filed by the petitioner prior in point of time
should be expedited and be disposed of first or in the alternate,
both the cases may be tried together.
2 Delay condoned.
3 Issue notice, returnable in four weeks.
4 Service be effected on the complainant-respondent through
Dasti.
5 Liberty to serve the Standing Counsel for the State of Madhya
Pradesh, in addition. “
2
3 Essentially, there are two criminal proceedings. On 1 November 2013, the
petitioners filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
1881 of which the JMFC took cognizance on 12 February 2014. It appears that
on 22 August 2014, the respondent has filed a complaint before the JMFC under
Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 against the
petitioners. Cognizance has been taken on 21 May 2015.
4 Having regard to the common factual background in both the criminal cases, we
are of the view that both the complaint filed by the petitioners and the complaint
filed by the respondent should be tried by one and the same Judge. The CJM,
Gwalior shall accordingly pass necessary administrative directions to ensure that
both the criminal cases, RCT Nos 15668 of 2013 and 4118 of 2015, are placed
for trial before the same Court.
5 The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
6 Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
…………...…...….......………………........J.
[Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud]
…..…..…....…........……………….…........J.
[Sanjiv Khanna]
New Delhi;
January 13, 2021
-S-
3
ITEM NO.30 Court 6 (Video Conferencing) SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).5142/2020
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 15-11-2019
in MCRC No. 27728/2017 passed by the High Court of M.P. at Gwalior)
PITAMBAR LOKWANI & ANR. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
DEEPAK RAO KHATKE Respondent(s)
(WITH I.R. and IA No.62179/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.62181/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
and IA No.62184/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT)
Date : 13-01-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Shishir Kumar Saxena, Adv.
Mr R. N.Pareek, Adv.
Ms. Pareena Swarup, Adv.
Mr. Ameet Singh, Adv.
Mr. Praveen Swarup, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Gopal Jha, AOR
Mr. Shreyash Bhardwaj, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1 Leave granted.
2 The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order.
3 Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
(SANJAY KUMAR-I) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR)
AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file)
