The petitioner herein is sole accused in C.C. No.453 of 2001, on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvottiyur, for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The case has been taken on file and, on behalf of the complainant, proof of affidavit was filed. While so, another complaint came to be filed by a family member of the complainant in the first case for an offence punishable under Section 420 IPC, and the allegation therein is that the petitioner committed cheating to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/-. On conclusion of the investigation, the third respondent referred the second case as of civil in nature, whereupon, Protest Petition has been filed by the complainant and the case was taken on file in C.C. No.4095 of 2005 by learned III Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the allegation in both the cases are that, in a chit transaction, the petitioner is bound to pay a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- and for such liability, a cheque has been issued and as the cheque got bounced, a complaint was given and consequent thereto, the first case viz., C.C. No.453 of 2001 was taken on file. That being so, on the same set of allegations, a second criminal complaint has been filed and the third respondent police, taking note of the fact that already a case is pending in C.C. No.453 of 2001, rightly referred the case as of civil in nature. According to the learned counsel, inasmuch as the second complaint, on protest, has been taken on file in C.C. No.4095 of 2005 by some other Magistrate, it is but appropriate that both the cases are tried together.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the first respondent submits that though liability in both the cases is the same, the complaint relating to cheque bouncing has been taken on file much earlier in point of time; therefore, the case in C.C. No.453 of 2001 need not be clubbed together and transferred to be tried along with C.C. No.4095 of 2005.
4. I have perused the materials available on record and carefully considered the rival contentions advanced on either side.
Concededly, the disputed liability is for a sum of Rs.7,00,000/-. Both the complainants from one family were running a Chit and only in such transaction, the liability and dispute arose. In order to clear the liability, the petitioner/accused is said to have issued the cheque. The transaction in both the cases being interconnected, there would be practical difficulty in filing documents which are common in nature before two courts of law. Inasmuch as joint trial of the cases would be convenient for both the parties and the same would in no way affect the interest of the complainants, I am of the considered view that the relief sought for may be granted.
5. Accordingly, C.C. No.453 of 2001 pending on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvottiyur, is ordered to be transferred to the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai, to be tried along with C.C. No.4095 of 2005. Since both the cases are long pending, learned III Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai, is directed to proceed with the trial of both the cases in accordance with law and complete the proceedings as expeditiously as possible.
Criminal Original Petition is ordered accordingly. Connected Miscellaneous Petition stands closed.
JI.
To The III Metropolitan Magistrate, G.T.
Chennai.