TMI Blog2002 (10) TMI 774X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partment registered FIRs against the respondent as a co-accused in the case registered against Messrs. Golden Forest (India) Limited. The offences were under Sections 406, 420, 468, 471, 120B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short IPC ) and Section 7(2) of the Punjab Reforms Act, 1972. According to the-prosecution, crores of rupees had been obtained by the said Company from . members of the public. But on the maturity date the sums were not returned. When proceedings were initiated in different courts the respondent filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short Cr.P.Ci. ) in the High Court praying that the charges framed against him may be dropped. Another application under Section 482 was filed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed of in terms of the earlier order of 28th March, 2000 in V.K. Sharma s case. On a query being raised by this Court, the learned counsel for the respondent sought to rely on Sections 218 and 220 of Cr.P.C. in an effort to justify his plea for the consolidation of the cases. Mr. Bali submitted that because of the proviso to Section 218, even where there are distinct offences being tried the Magistrate can direct that the same be tried together. In our opinion, proviso to Section 218 would apply only in such a case where the distinct offences for which the accused is charged are being tried before the same Magistrate. In the instant case, offences were being tried before different Magistrates and proviso to Section 218 cannot give any si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... doing complete justice in any case or matter. But even in exercising this power, it is more than doubtful that an order can be passed contrary to law. In V.K. Sharma s case, this Court did not purport to exercise any jurisdiction under Article 142. The decision to direct the applicant to file applications to be moved for consolidations of the cases pending in different Courts for different offences to be tried in a single court was not in accordance with law, and the said decision of V.K. Sharma and that of P.K. Sharma are over-ruled. For the aforesaid reasons, this appeal is allowed and the impugned decision of the High Court is set aside. We make it clear that any observations made in this order shall not prejudice the respondent in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
