Allowed

Shreyansh Motilal Gada v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC19 Nov 2019APPLN/108/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment clubbed four pending criminal complaints alleging the same offence under Section 500 IPC, originally assigned to different courts in Thane and Mumbai. The High Court held that clubbing was in the interest of the complainant and the trial must proceed at Esplanade Court.

What did the court decide?

The complaints are clubbed together and ordered to be tried at Esplanade Court (Killa Court), Mumbai, assigned to a Metropolitan Magistrate.

Shreyansh Motilal Gada Vs the State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

15 appln 108.2019.doc

¶2

1/4

¶3

Dusane

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 108 OF 2019

¶6

Shreyansh Motilal Gada....Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.....Respondents

¶7

Mr. Saiyed Sahil M. Nagamiya a/w Mr. Nilesh Gala for the Applicant.
Mr. R.M. Pethe, APP for Respondent no.1.
Mr. Krishna K. Holambe-Patil for Respondent no.2.

¶8

Coram : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.
Date : 19th November 2019

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

1. Respondent-complainant, father-in-law of the non applicant

¶11

no.1 in all these applications has initiated prosecution for an offence
under Section 500 of Indian Penal Code, which is punishable with
maximum sentence of two years imprisonment.

¶12

2.The complaints are pending at Thane Court, Explanade

¶13

(Killa) Court, Bandra Court and Borivali Court.

¶14

3. The accused persons in all complaints are same, so also the complainants.

¶15

Dusane

¶16

2/415 appln 108.2019.doc

¶17

4.In the background of the pleading in said applications,
relations between the parties and the witnesses cited in the
proceedings, provisions of Section 407 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure are invoked, praying for clubbing of these matters so as to
avoid repetitions of recording evidence and contradictory findings. The
submissions are that these four complaints be transferred to any of the
Court where the said complaints are pending, as per convenience of the
complainants.

¶18

5.This prayer is opposed by learned counsel for the
complainant, non-applicant on the ground that there is no similarity of
cause alleged in each of the complaint. As a consequence of the above,
since the witnesses are from various parts of Thane and Mumbai, they
will have to put to inconvenience including the complainant. Reliance
is also placed on the cause, which is formed to be the basis for initiating
such complaints. It is further prayed that based on each events, since
different cause is alleged, the law contemplates of trying the complaints
independently at the Courts to which they are assigned to.

¶19

Dusane

¶20

3/415 appln 108.2019.doc

¶21

6.Further submission is that a suit for damages is pending
before the competent Civil Court at the place of the complainant. As
such the prayer for rejection is made.

¶22

7.Considered the submissions. The fact remains that all these

¶23

four complaints are pending before the respective courts and are
initiated between one and same party and the nature of offences is also
same, is not in dispute.

¶24

8.The only ground, which appears to be somewhat logical in

¶25

support of the claim for transfer and clubbing is, the said complaints
are based on the events, which have occurred at respective places,
based on which the complaints are assigned to the respective Courts.
However, said submission by itself will not act as a statutory embargo
on the powers of this Court to decide a reasonable request for clubbing
and trying the complaints at one and the single place at the
convenience of the complainant as the same prima facie appears to be
in the interest of the complainant also.

¶26

Dusane

¶27

4/415 appln 108.2019.doc

¶28

9.In the aforesaid background of facts, it will be appropriate
in my opinion to club all these four complaints together and are
directed to be tried at Esplanade Court (Killa Court), Court No. 28
Mumbai. As such, following order is passed :

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

i) The Complaints are clubbed together and be tried at
Esplanade Court (Killa Court), Mumbai. The Senior-most Judge shall
assign all these complaints to any of the Metropolitan Magistrate of
Esplanade Court.

¶31

ii)All the applications are allowed in above terms

¶32

( NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. )

Shreyansh Motilal Gada v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shreyansh Motilal Gada v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.R. Joshi (Bardikar) Vs Santosh Popat Khare and Anr.

Shamrao Krishna Patil Vs Maruti Bapu Ghatge and Anr.

Damu Kamalya Kambdi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Arif Rashid Khan Vs Aarif Hamid Khan and Anr.

Vinayak Chandrakant Bhosale and Ors. Vs Neelan Vinayak Bhosale and Anr.

Sikandar Abdul Kadir Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.