IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8698 of 2008 JAY NARAYAN BHAGAT @ JAI BHAT, SON OF LATE JITAN BHAGAT, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BADARAM, P.S. HUSSAINGANJ, DISTRICT SIWAN. --- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SURENDRA KUMAR VERMA, SON OF LATE SRI RASIK BIHARI SHARAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE VIDHWALIA, P.S. RAGHUNATHPUR AT PRESENT, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BADARAM, P.S. HUSSAINGANJ, DISTRICT SIWAN. --- OPPOSITE PARTIES ----------- 2 18.2.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. An occurrence took place on 28.3.2006 in which the Mukhiya was injured and finally died on 29.3.2006 at P.M.C.H., Patna. The case was instituted by Vidya Bhushan Prasad, the uncle of the deceased which is numbered as Hussainganj PS Case No. 54 of 2006 (annexure-2) in which seven of the accused are named. An another case was instituted for the same occurrence by the wife of one Raghaw Prasad who is a named accused in Hussainganj P.S. Case No. 53 of 2006. In this case there are fifteen named accused persons. The third case was instituted by one Surendra Kumar Verma who is the father of the accused in Hussainganj PS Case No. 54 of 2006. In this case four persons along with some unknown persons have been made accused. Initially it was a complaint petition which was later converted into a First Information Report numbered as Hussainganj PS Case No. 1 of 2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the police had refused to institute this case on the ground that there was already a case pending with respect to this offence which is Hussainganj PS Case No. 53 of 2006 and Hussainganj PS Case No. 54 of 2006. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan directed that the case 2 may be instituted and on the basis of this fact the case was instituted. The petitioner has filed an application for quashing of the First Information Report of Hussainganj PS Case No. 1 of 2008. Learned counsel submits that this case is covered by the judgment delivered in the case of T.T. Antony Vs. State of Kerala and Others, reported in (2001) 6 SCC 181. In my opinion this case would not be covered by the case of T.T. Anthony as the accused persons are not common and as far as Hussainganj PS Case No. 53 of 2006 is concerned, it may be in a way considered a counter version of Hussainganj PS Case No. 54 of 2006. It is apparent that Hussainganj PS Case No. 1 of 2008 has been filed giving a separate version to the occurrence as described in Hussainganj PS Case No. 53 of 2006 and Hussainganj PS Case No. 54 of 2006. The matter has now been investigated and charge sheet has been submitted. Whether this case can be heard together or not after charge sheet submitted in all the three cases and cognizance orders are passed would depend on the facts of these cases. This fact should be considered by the Court at the stage of commitment of the case so that the evidence can come as a whole and should not overlap in the three cases. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)