Cr.Misc. M 26835 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.Misc. M 26835 of 2010 Date of decision:13.9.2010 Balwinder Singh Petitioner vs. State of Haryana. Respondent Present: Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate. M.M.S.BEDI,J. The petitioner is aggrieved by the launching of prosecution against the petitioner twice regarding the theft of the same motor cycle. As per the case of the prosecution, on 5.8.2009, a motor cycle Hero Honda Splendor bearing No. HR-05-M-5040 was stolen from district Karnal and an FIR No. 511 dated 5.8.2009 u/s 379 IPC was got registered at P.S. City Karnal on the complaint of Ramesh Kumar. Thereafter, the said motor cycle was recovered from Gohana District Sonepat on the secret information of ASI Azad Singh and in this regard case FIR No.278 dated 31.8.2009 u/s 379/411 IPC was registered against the petitioner. Charges have been framed against the petitioner. It is a settled principle of law that there can be only single trial for single offence and cognizance of the offence can be taken by a court only once. In the present case, the cognizance has already been taken by the court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Gohana in FIR No. 278 dated 31.8.2009 u/s 379/411 IPC, as is apparent from the charges, which have been framed on 16.3.2010 (Annexure P-3). Learned counsel for the petitioner informs that charges have not been framed in FIR No. 511 dated 5.8.2009 registered at P.S. Karnal Cr.Misc. M 26835 of 2010 2 City. Notice of motion to A.G.Haryana. On the asking of the court Mr. Amit Rana, DAG, Haryana accpets notice. The matter is covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in T.T.Antony vs State of Kerala and Ors 2001(3) RCR (Cr.) 436, laying down that when there are more than one informations given to the police in respect of the same incident, the police officer need not to enter every one in Station House Diary. The lodging of the second FIR is not permissible. In the present case, the first FIR was registered on the basis of the complaint of Ramesh Kumar u/s 379 IPC. The second FIR was registered at P.S.Gohana District Sonepat, on the basis of the petitioner having been found in possession of stolen motor cycle. There can be more than one informations pertaining to the same incident in different police stations but the petitioner can be tried only in one case. So far as the information at Police Station Sadar is concerned, it was the second information on the basis of a secret information and in the said case the cognizance has already been taken by the court, therefore, in the interest of justice and to prevent the abuse of the process of the court, it is ordered that the investigation, conducted in FIR No.511 dated 5.8.2009 u/s 379 IPC at P.S. City Karnal will be treated as investigation in FIR No.278 dated 31.8.2009 as the cognizance has not yet been taken in FIR No.511 dated 5.8.2009 u/s 379 IPC, P.S. City Karnal. The concerned court will not take cognizance of the said FIR and would send the challan to the court of Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Gohana for trial along with FIR No. 278 dated 31.8.2009. Disposed of. September 13 ,2010 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) Cr.Misc. M 26835 of 2010 3 TSM JUDGE