2025 INSC 727 1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO. 394 OF 2024

RAVINDER SINGH SIDHU PETITIONER(s)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. RESPONDENT(s)

J U D G M E N T

K.V. Viswanathan, J.

1. The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking to issue an

appropriate writ, order or direction for clubbing and transferring the

multiple First Information Reports (FIRs) registered against the

petitioner in different States to the Court of competent jurisdiction at

Panchkula, Haryana. Though this is the prayer made in the petition,

learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner states that he would only

press for consolidation of the multiple FIRs in each of the States to

one district within the respective States. It should also be noticed that

2

as far as the original prayer made in the petition is concerned, on

facts, it was clearly not maintainable since a similar prayer made by

the petitioner in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 206 of 2020 filed in this

Court on 20.07.2020 was rejected on 17.08.2020. Considering the

fact that the petitioner is now seeking the alternative prayer and the

respective States during the hearing have not objected to the same, we

have decided to entertain the petition in the special facts and

circumstances of the case.

2. In all, there are 64 FIRs registered in 10 States. The States

concerned which are parties to the writ petition are Punjab (23 FIRs),

Madhya Pradesh (2 FIRs), Haryana (6 FIRs), Gujarat (4 FIRs),

Chhattisgarh (1 FIR), NCT of Delhi (1 FIR), Uttarakhand (5 FIRs),

Rajasthan (5 FIRs), Uttar Pradesh (15 FIRs) and Himachal Pradesh

(2 FIRs).

3. It should also be mentioned that, out of the above, already trial

is concluded in some and in three cases convictions have been

recorded. In two cases acquittals have been recorded, in two cases

there have been cancellation reports, 15 cases are at the evidence

3

stage and 21 cases are at the stage where charge-sheets have been

filed. We are not concerned with the cases where convictions or

acquittals have been recorded or in some cases where cancellation

reports are filed.

4. The different FIRs are primarily for offences under Sections

406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120B, 34, 263, 114 of

the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). Some of the Sections referred to

herein have been invoked in a few FIRs and in some all the Sections

have been invoked. Along with this in some FIRs the local Acts of

the State like the Gujarat Police Act, 1951, the Haryana Protection of

Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2013, the Prize

Chits And Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, the

Madhya Pradesh Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam,

2000 and the Uttarakhand Protection of Interests of Depositors (in

Financial Establishments) Act, 2005 have been invoked depending

upon the State concerned.

5. The petitioner herein Ravinder Singh Sidhu has been in custody

since 11.10.2018. He was the Managing Director of KIM

4

Infrastructure and Developers Limited (for short ‘KIDL’). The

petitioner along with other directors is alleged to have floated two

schemes for allotment of developed land where customers were lured

to be part of a lumpsum payment plan or a deferred payment plan.

6. When the matters stood thus, Writ Petition No. 3332 of 2010

was filed before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at its Gwalior

Bench for inquiry against financial companies including ‘KIDL’, on

the ground that the companies were seeking deposits from the public

with promise of repayment with higher returns ranging from 15 to 20

per cent. The High Court ordered an inquiry by the Central Bureau of

Investigation (CBI). The CBI conducted a preliminary investigation

and submitted a report concluding that many of the named companies

indulged in profiteering schemes without even having the capacity to

repay along with the promised rate of return.

7. On 13.07.2012, the Writ Petition was disposed of by the High

Court with a direction to the concerned authorities to take appropriate

action in accordance with law. Pursuant thereto, the Securities and

Exchange Board of India (SEBI) initiated inquiry against ‘KIDL’.

5

KIDL’s attempt to get the scheme registered as a Collective

Investment Scheme (CIS) was rejected on the ground that possessing

a registration was a pre-condition for initiating/launching/sponsoring

(CIS) under the SEBI Act, 1992. Certain proceedings were taken by

SEBI with which we are not directly concerned here.

8. In the meantime, the first FIR came to be registered against

KIDL and its directors by investors as well as by agents appointed by

KIDL for mobilizing the investment money. As stated earlier,

multiple FIRs came to be registered alleging commission of diverse

offences due to default in honoring the commitments and due to

failure of KIDL and the petitioner to repay the amounts. It is in this

background that the present Writ Petition came to be filed.

9. Notices were issued in the Writ Petition and the States of

Uttarakhand, Punjab, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat and Uttar

Pradesh have filed counter affidavits. Though in the counter

affidavits, the States have opposed the clubbing, at the hearing there

was a broad consensus about consolidating the cases in the respective

States.

6

10. Heard learned Senior Counsel/Counsel for the parties. The law

in this issue is now fairly well settled. It has been held by this Court

that multiplicity of proceedings will not be in larger public interest.

Further, since many States have invoked local Acts, particularly the

Act dealing with the Protection of Interest of Depositors, transferring

them out of the State also will not serve the ends of justice. Hence, the

correct course of action would be to merge the FIRs with the earliest

FIR in the State concerned. It is clarified that if the first FIR in the

respective States of Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya

Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand is

registered in respect of offence under the general law and not the

special enactment, but if the subsequent FIRs now clubbed are

registered in connection with the special law or registered also in

connection with the special law, the same after clubbing must be tried

under the special law by the Special Court(s). [See Radhey Shyam v.

State of Haryana and Ors., 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1935 and

Abhishek Singh Chauhan v. Union of India and Ors., 2022 SCC

OnLine SC 1936].

7

11. We propose to follow the said course of action. In view of the above

in the State of Gujarat, the following 3 FIRs will now be merged with

FIR No. I-79/2018 dated 27.09.2018 registered at Bhavnagar Gangajaliya.

Sr.

No.

FIR No. Date Police Station Place

1. I-92/2018 26.11.2018 Bhavnagar

Gangajaliya

2. I-293/2018 18.11.2018 P.S. Vadaj Ahmedabad City

3. I-285/2018 14.11.2018 P.S. Vadaj Ahmedabad City

12. In the State of Haryana, the following 5 FIRs will now be

merged with FIR No. 24/2018 dated 16.01.2018 registered at Ambala

P.S. Ambala Cant.

Sr.

No.

FIR No. Date Police Station Place

1. 98/2019

04.04.2019 Bhiwani Civil

Lines

Bhiwani

2. 167/2022

01.08.2022 Raipur Rani

Panchkula

3. 235/2021

21.05.2021 Hisar City

Hisar

4. 1015/2018

09.10.2018 Sirsa City

Sirsa

5. 503/2019

COMI No.

110/2020)

NA Narnaul

Narnaul

8

13. In the State of Himachal Pradesh, the following FIR will now

be merged with FIR No. 13/2019 registered at Hamirpur, P.S.

Sujanpur Tira.

Sr.

No.

FIR No. Date Police Station Place

1. 202/2019 09.12.2019 Jawali Kangra

14. In the State of Madhya Pradesh, the following FIR will now be

merged with FIR No. 496/2018 dated 05.12.2018 registered at

Jabalpur P.S. Lordganj.

Sr.

No.

FIR No. Date Police Station Place

1. 176/2020 24.05.2020 Kotwali Anuppur Anuppur

15. In the State of Punjab, the following 16 FIRs will now be

merged with FIR No. 198/2018 dated 23.10.2018 registered at SAS

Nagar, P.S. Phase I.

Sr.

No.

FIR No. Date Police Station Place

1.

183/2020

12.08.2020 Dasuya Hoshiarpur

2.

62/2021

21.04.2021 Dasuya

Hoshiarpur

3.

291/2020

16.12.2020 Dasuya

Hoshiarpur

4.

81/2021

21.04.2021 City Gurdaspur Gurdaspur

9

5.

151/2021

04.08.2021 City Hoshiarpur

Hoshiarpur

6.

280/2020

12.12.2020 City Hoshiarpur

Hoshiarpur

7. 30/2022

04.03.2022 Anaj Mandi Patiala

8. 55/2021

23.05.2021 Talwara Hoshiarpur

9. 99/2021

20.05.2021 Talwara Hoshiarpur

10.

64/2021

20.05.2021 City Batala Batala

(Gurdaspur)

11. 141/2019

02.09.2019 City Gurdaspur Gurdaspur

P.S.

12. 0043/2019

12.02.2019 City Tarn Taran

Tarn Taran

13. 07/2021

16.01.2021

City Hoshiarpur

14. 53/2021

29.03.2021

City Hoshiarpur

15. 05/2024

06.03.2024 N.R.I.

Amritsar

16. 144/2024

29.10.2024 Kotwali

Bathinda

16. In the State of Rajasthan, the following 3 FIRs will now be

merged with FIR No. 878/2018 dated 20.11.2018 registered at Karauli

P.S. Hindon.

Sr.

No.

FIR No. Date Police Station Place

1. 125/2019

06.06.2019 Tibbi

Hanumangarh

2. 90/2019

12.03.2019 Bhupalpura

Udaipur

3. 292/2019

05.08.2019 Vidhayakpuri Jaipur City

(South)

10

17. In the State of Uttar Pradesh, the following 14 FIRs will now

be merged with FIR No. 28/2019 dated 13.01.2019 registered at Basti

P.S. Kotwali.

Sr.

No.

FIR No. Date Police Station Place

1. 82/2019 09.02.2019 Hari Parvat Agra

2. 303/2019

25.06.2019 Aonla

Bareilly

3. 617/2020 25.12.2020 Nawabad Jhansi

4.

33/2019

15.03.2019 Harbans Mohal East

(Commissionerate

Kanpur City)

5.

55/2019

11.05.2019 Harbans Mohal East

(Commissionerate

Kanpur City)

6.

57/2019

14.05.2019 Harbans Mohal East

(Commissionerate

Kanpur City)

7. 480/2020 Sungarhi Pilibhit

8. 409/2019 Sungarhi Pilibhit

9.

119/2019

15.02.2019 Sigra Kashi

(Commissionerate

Varanasi)

10. 189/2019

29.05.2019 Bhadohi

Bhadohi

11. 406/2019

19.05.2019 Cantt

Gorakhpur

12. 361/2019

18.06.2019 Sigra

Varanasi

13. 463/2019

23.10.2019 Sigra

Varanasi

14. 280/2022 Bareilly Faridpur

11

18. In the State of Uttarakhand, the following 4 FIRs will now be

merged with FIR No. 107/2018 dated 30.10.2018 registered at

Pithoragarh P.S. Kotwali Pithoragarh.

Sr.

No.

FIR No. Date Police Station Place

1. 165/2019

24.08.2019 Mukhani

Nainital

2. 30/2019

07.07.2019 Lohaghat

Champawat

3. 44/2019

19.02.2019 Jaspur Udham Singh

Nagar

4. 86/2024

24.04.2024

Mukhani Nainital

19. The writ petition stands allowed in the above terms. We further

direct while the first FIR will be treated as the First Information

Report (hereinafter for convenience called the ‘principal FIR’), the

subsequent FIRs in each State shall be treated as Statements under

Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The

Investigating Officer in the criminal case arising out of the principal

FIR in the concerned State will be free to file supplementary charge-

sheets after the collation of all records concerning other FIRs in the

concerned State which are clubbed in terms of this order. We further

direct that if Police Report under Section 173 of CrPC stands already

12

filed in the clubbed FIRs and the concerned Courts have taken

cognizance thereof, the said FIRs and criminal cases would also stand

transferred and merged/clubbed along with the principal FIR to be

proceeded with in accordance with law.

20. The investigating officer in the principal proceedings will be

free to file supplementary charge-sheet on the basis of the material

collated during investigation of other FIRs. We also make it clear that

the other offences not part of the special enactments can also be tried

by the Special Court under the concerned State legislation. We also

further direct that in case the petitioner has been granted bail in

connection with the principal proceeding/criminal case to which the

other cases have been clubbed, the bail so granted must enure to the

petitioner’s favour in the other FIRs now clubbed as well. We further

clarify that if the principal FIR is limited to offence under the general

law/Penal Code but the subsequent FIRs contain allegations attracting

offences under the special enactment or certain other IPC offences

and if the bail granted is only for some offences under the general

law, the Special Court is entitled to insist for a fresh bail application

to be filed by the petitioner in relation to those offences including

13

under the Special Act. The said bail application(s) shall be decided

on its own merits in accordance with law.

21. We make it clear that our direction is confined to the offences

mentioned in the present order, namely, the offences under the IPC

and the concerned State enactment mentioned herein.

22. As far as the State of Chhattisgarh and NCT of Delhi are

concerned, since there is only one case each, the said case will

proceed in those States in accordance with law and the question of

clubbing does not arise. We have passed the above order in exercise

of powers under Article 32 read with our powers under Article 142 of

the Constitution of India.

……….........................CJI.

[B. R. GAVAI]

..……….........................J.

[K. V. VISWANATHAN ]

New Delhi;

19

th May, 2025.