Crl. Misc. No.M-33220 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-33220 of 2010 Date of Decision: October 18, 2011 Manoj Kumar @ Nanha …..Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr. Mohinder Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Brar, AAG, Punjab. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Without entering into the merits of the case, the petition deserves to be dismissed solely on the ground that quashing of an FIR has been prayed for by one accused without impleading the other co-accused who are likely to be affected by the adjudication of the matter. Besides this, the FIR No.129 dated September 26, 2009 registered at the instance of Anil Dhull against the petitioner and others cannot be quashed even if the ratio of the judgment of T.T. Antony Vs. State of Kerala, (2001) 6 SCC 1791 is Crl. Misc. No.M-33220 of 2010 [2] followed. At the most, the investigation in second FIR can be considered to be an investigation under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C. in the first FIR and one trial can be ordered. For the abovesaid reason, the petition is dismissed. However, it will be open to the petitioner alongwith other co-accused to move an application for transfer of both the trials arisen out of the FIR Nos. 129 and 130 pertaining to the same incident dated September 26, 2009 to one Court for trail for simultaneous adjudication. In case any such application is moved, the learned Sessions Judge will consider the facts and circumstances and would be entitled to transfer both the trials to one Court. October 18, 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE