V.M.JAIN, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C., read with Section 186, Cr.P.C. filed by the accused-petitioner, Jaswinder Singh @ Soni, for deciding the question of jurisdiction and for ordering dis-continuation of the proceedings pending before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, in CBI case dated 17.1.1997, under Section 120-B read with Sections 420/467/468/471, IPC, Section 12 of the Passport Act and Section 24 of the Immigration Act (commonly known as Malta Boat Tragedy case), as various FIRs regarding the same transaction are already pending against the petitioner in the various courts, in the State of Punjab.
(2.) IN my opinion, it is not necessary to give facts of the case in detail, in view of the order dated 4.5.2000, passed by the Delhi High Court, in Criminal Misc. (M) No. 1651 of 1999 titled as Kuljit Singh @ Jeetu v. CBI and others. As admitted by the petitioner himself, one case was registered by the CBI on 17.1.1997, referred to above (commonly known as Malta Boat Tragedy case) and the matter was pending before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, in that regard. Various other FIRs were registered in various Police Stations in the State of Punjab, against various accused, including the accused-petitioner, Jaswinder Singh @ Soni. So far as the case registered by the CBI is concerned, Jaswinder Singh @ Soni, petitioner, is one of the accused. Similarly, Kuljit Singh @ Jeetu and others, who were the petitioners before the Delhi High Court in Criminal Misc. (M) No. 1651 of 1999 and other cases, decided on 4.5.2000, were also accused in the CBI case, referred to above. They were also accused in various FIRs registered in various Police Stations of Punjab. However, it is not disputed that in the CBI case at New Delhi, the petitioner is also an accused, besides Kuljit Singh, etc., who are also accused in the said case. However, it has been alleged that some of the cases in Punjab are different inasmuch as in some cases, Jaswinder Singh @ Soni, is an accused, while in other cases, others are accused, including Kuljit Singh @ Jeetu, aforesaid.
(3.) IN the aforesaid case, Kuljit Singh @ Jeetu and others, the matter came up before the Delhi High Court, for deciding the following question :- "Whereas this Court or the High Court of Punjab and Haryana is competent to decide the question as to in which of the two courts, viz., the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, or the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Distt. Hoshiarpur (Punjab) enquiry or trial shall proceed in respect of offences concerning the Malta Boat Tragedy ?" After considering the entire matter, the Delhi High Court found that not only the Delhi High Court was competent to decide the aforesaid question under Section 186, Cr.P.C., but even otherwise, it was found that the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi shall try the cases concerning the Malta Boat Tragedy.;