AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This criminal misc petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 07.07.2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Banswara (hereinafter referred to as "the revisional court") in Criminal Revision Petition No.7/2010, whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. The said revision petition has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 21.03.2001 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banswara (hereinafter referred to as "the trial court") in Criminal Regular Case No.169/2001, whereby the trial court has rejected the Final Report No.104/1999 arising out of FIR No.705/1998 of Police Station, Banswara and took cognizance against the petitioner and five other co-accused persons for the offences punishable under Section 420, 471 and 120-B IPC and also directed the police to conduct further investigation for the purpose of ascertaining the role of the Bank Officials.
Being aggrieved with the order dated 21.03.2001 passed by the trial court, the petitioner has preferred revision petition before the revisional court mainly on the ground that the trial court has grossly erred in taking cognizance against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 420, 471 and 120-B IPC in connection with FIR No.705/1998 of Police Station, Banswara because for the same incident already the FIR No.645/1998 was registered against the petitioner, in which the charge-sheet had already been filed by the police and, therefore, for the same incident two FIRs are not maintainable.
The revisional court has dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner while observing that the trial court has already consolidated both the FIR Nos.705/1998 and 645/1998 and, therefore, the order of taking cognizance against the petitioner in connection with the FIR No.705/1998, cannot be said to be illegal.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and after going through the impugned orders passed by the courts below, this Court is also of the opinion that when two FIRs for the same incident have been filed and the trial court has consolidated both the FIRs and took cognizance against the petitioner, then I don't find any reason to interfere with the orders impugned passed by the courts below.
Accordingly, this criminal misc. petition is dismissed.
Stay petition also stands dismissed