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