logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 Meg HC 077 My Notes print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Meghalaya
Case No : Crl. Petn. No. 109 of 2026 with Crl. Petn. No. 110 of 2026 Crl. Petn. No. 111 of 2026 Crl. Petn. No. 112 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. REVATI MOHITE DERE
Parties : S.G. Esmatur Mominin Versus The State of Meghalaya, Represented by the Secretary Department of Home (Police) Government of Meghalaya, East Khasi Hills & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: N. Khera, with A. Syiem, T. Marngar, R. Kharkrang, Advocate. For the Respondents: N.D. Chullai, AAG with N.G. Shylla, PP, E.R. Chyne, Addl.PP.
Date of Judgment : 04-08-2026
Head Note :-
Case Refered:
Amish Devgan v. Union of India & ors - (2021) 1 SCC 1

Comparative Citation:
2026 MLHC 821,
Judgment :-

Judgment (Oral):

1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner in all the aforesaid petitions seeks leave to amend the prayer clause i.e., to delete the prayer for quashing of the respective FIRs and instead to replace the said prayer with clubbing of the cases with the lead case registered with Araimile Police Station, which was registered first in point of time. Leave granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith during the course of the day.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties in all the aforesaid petitions and is taken up for final disposal.

3. Mr. Chullai, learned AAG waives notice on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 3 in all the petitions.

4. By these petitions, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to club all the cases registered against him in West Garo Hills District, with the case registered with Araimile Police Station, which was registered first in point of time. The details of the case of which clubbing is sought is as under;

                  

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner in all the aforesaid petitions submits that, all the cases registered with the Phulbari Police Station and Araimile Police Station, arise out of the same chain of events relating to GHADC election, the assault on the petitioner and the subsequent address made by the petitioner to the members of the public. He submits that the complaints made to the concerned police stations, pursuant to which FIRs were registered, were based essentially on media reports and video clips and not on personal knowledge.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner in this connection submitted that there cannot be registration of separate FIRs with respect to the same cause of action. In connection with the said submission, learned counsel relied on the judgments of the Apex Court in Amish Devgan v. Union of India & ors reported in (2021) 1 SCC 1, T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala & ors reported in (2001) 6 SCC 181 and Arnab Ranjan Goswami v. Union of India reported in (2020) 14 SCC 12.

7. Mr. Chullai, learned AAG does not dispute the proposition laid down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgments. Mr. Chullai, on instruction states that four FIRs registered with the Phulbari Police Station out of which, two have already been clubbed, will forthwith be transferred and clubbed with the Araimile Police Station i.e., where Araimile P.S. Case No.19 of 2026, is already registered against the petitioner on 10th March, 2026. Mr. Chullai also does not dispute the fact that, all the FIRs arise out of the same cause of action and that having regard to the judgments in this regard, the police will forthwith transfer Phulbari P.S. Case No.10 of 2026; Phulbari P.S. Case No.11 of 2026; Phulbari P.S. Case No.12 of 2026 and Phulbari P.S. Case No.13 of 2026 to Araimile Police Station and club it with the said FIR, which was registered with Araimile Police Station, first in point of time. Statement accepted.

8. Accordingly, all papers in connection with aforesaid Phulbari Police Station Cases be transferred to Araimile Police Station within three days from the date of uploading the order, and the said four cases be clubbed with FIR registered with Araimile Police Station.

9. In view of the aforesaid statement made by Mr. Chullai, learned AAG, nothing survives for further consideration in these petitions.

10. The petitions are allowed and Rule is made absolute on the aforesaid terms.

11. Petitions are disposed of accordingly.

12. Needless to state that, the petitioner is always at liberty after the cases are clubbed to file a fresh petition seeking quashing of the proceeding, if he so desires.

13. All parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
 
  CDJLawJournal