The appellant herein is alleged to have issued four
cheques to the respondent no.2 which allegedly bounced.
The respondent no.2 sent one notice in terms of Section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments At, 1881 with regard to
bouncing of all the four cheques. Thereafter, complaints
were filed in the year 1999 and these complaints have
dragged on for 20 years only on the application of the
appellant herein that all the four complaints should be
consolidated and heard together.
Whether these cases had been heard together or
separately, they would have been decided by now only
because of the interim proceedings, even the evidence has
not been recorded.
The main ground raised is that in terms of Section
219 of the Code of Criminal Procedure since the offences
took place during the period of one year, the cases
should be dealt together. Even if Section 219 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure was to apply, there have to be two
trials because not more than three cases can be tried
together even if they occurred in one year.
The only other contention is that since one notice
has been issued, four separate trials should not take
place and one trial should take place. There is no
provision of consolidation of cases in the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S).587-590 OF 2010
VANI AGRO ENTERPRISES Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Dated:September 05, 2019
Print Page
cheques to the respondent no.2 which allegedly bounced.
The respondent no.2 sent one notice in terms of Section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments At, 1881 with regard to
bouncing of all the four cheques. Thereafter, complaints
were filed in the year 1999 and these complaints have
dragged on for 20 years only on the application of the
appellant herein that all the four complaints should be
consolidated and heard together.
Whether these cases had been heard together or
separately, they would have been decided by now only
because of the interim proceedings, even the evidence has
not been recorded.
The main ground raised is that in terms of Section
219 of the Code of Criminal Procedure since the offences
took place during the period of one year, the cases
should be dealt together. Even if Section 219 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure was to apply, there have to be two
trials because not more than three cases can be tried
together even if they occurred in one year.
The only other contention is that since one notice
has been issued, four separate trials should not take
place and one trial should take place. There is no
provision of consolidation of cases in the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S).587-590 OF 2010
VANI AGRO ENTERPRISES Vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Dated:September 05, 2019
