In a significant move aimed at streamlining judicial proceedings, the Rajasthan High Court has ordered the consolidation of over 130 FIRs registered against Girdhar Singh Sodha, former Chairperson of Navjeevan Credit Cooperative Society.

Sodha faces multiple allegations of cheating, criminal breach of trust, and misappropriation of investor funds, with cases filed across Rajasthan and other states under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act (BUDS Act).

The directive came in response to Sodha's plea seeking consolidation of the numerous trials. Justice Farjand Ali, allowing the plea, observed that conducting individual trials in various districts would not only be cumbersome but might also outlast the lifespan of the accused.

“Conducting separate trials in district-level Magistrate Courts and Sessions Courts for offences arising from the same cause of action defeats the purpose of criminal prosecution. It would only prolong the process, contrary to the spirit of justice, and result in undue hardship for all parties involved,” the Court noted.

The Court underscored that this approach would violate the fundamental rights of both the accused and the prosecution, especially when the accusations, nature of evidence, and the accused are common across all cases.

The bench emphasized that the core allegation in all FIRs pertains to a single transactional activity: Sodha’s alleged formation of a society that lured individuals into investing, only to defraud them later. Despite being filed in different areas, each case shares the same underlying facts.

Referring to Section 219 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which permits the clubbing of only three similar cases committed within a year, the Court acknowledged a legal gap in situations involving a larger number of cases.

“When more than three similar cases, involving the same accused and same nature of charges, are filed within a year, the CrPC does not explicitly provide for clubbing them together. However, the broader spirit of the law supports such consolidation,” the Court stated. “This is where the principle of Ubi Jus Ibi Remedium—where there is a right, there is a remedy—steps in.”

As a Constitutional Court, the bench emphasized its duty to ensure that justice is not only done but also seen to be done. “The accused has been caught in a relentless cycle of criminal proceedings without any meaningful progress. In effect, the process itself has become a form of punishment,” the Court remarked.

Taking into account Sodha’s age (47 years) and the pendency of 133 cases, the Court noted that allowing separate trials would consume decades. It, therefore, directed that cases from nearby districts be grouped and tried together at centralized, convenient locations for all stakeholders.

The Court further instructed District and Sessions Judges to transfer cases triable by Magistrates to the Chief Judicial Magistrates within their jurisdictions. Additionally, cases filed under the BUDS Act, along with related offences, are to be transferred to the District and Sessions Judge, Jodhpur, for consolidated trial.

Advocate Priyanka Borana represented the petitioner in the case.