Judgment : 1. Heard learned respective counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, petition is taken up for final hearing. 3. By the present petition filed by the petitioner/original accused under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and under section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prayed that order passed by the Principal District Judge, Latur in Criminal M.A.No.21/2012 below Exhibit No.1 on 12.06.2012 be quashed and set aside and Criminal case nos. STCC 1091/2010, STCC 1468/2010, STCC 154/2011, STCC 592/2011 pending before 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and STCC No.1574/2011 pending before 9th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and STCC 153/2012 pending before 10th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and STCC No.646/2012 pending before 8th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur be transferred and be tried before any one Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur. 4. Factual matrix of the present case is that the petitioner is dealing in the business of share broking, purchase and sale of shares/stocks under the name and style “Radhika Investment” at Latur. The respondent No.1 is also engaged in transaction of shares through the petitioner. According to the petitioner, respondent No.1 had filed about seven criminal cases one after another against the petitioner under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and all the said criminal cases are between the petitioner and respondent no.1 i.e. between the same parties. It is submitted that cause of action arose for all these case is one and the same. It is also submitted that all the cheques have been issued by the petitioner in favour of the respondent no.1 out of the same transaction. 5. It is further submitted that, earlier respondent no.1 had filed criminal cases on 14.8.2012 against the petitioner out of which three cases were pending before 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and one was pending before 6th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and therefore, the petitioner filed Criminal M.A. No.35/2011 to club all the said cases together and learned Principal District Judge, Latur allowed the said application on 14.10.2011 and all the said cases were brought together before 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur for the disposal in accordance with law. Thereafter, respondent no.1 had filed one more criminal case i.e. STCC No. 1574/2011 against petitioner on 21.11.2011 arising out of the same transaction and which is pending before 9th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur. Again respondent no.1 had filed STCC No.153/2012 on 15.02.2012 arising out of same transaction against petitioner, which is pending before 10th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur. Hence, the petitioner herein preferred Criminal M.A. No.21/2012 before learned Sessions Judge, Latur on 3.4.2012 requesting to club the four cases pending before 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and one case pending before 10th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and another case pending before 9th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur between the same parties together contending that said cases are arising out of same transaction which are between the same parties. However, said application was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Latur by order dated 12.06.2012. 6. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 3.4.2012, the petitioner has preferred present writ petition for the prayers as stated herein above. 7. The petitioner also sought leave to amend the present petition and incorporated that STCC No.646/2012 was also filed by the respondent no.1 against the petitioner which is pending before 8th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and requested that said case also be clubbed along with the above referred cases and all the said cases be brought before one and the same court, for the disposal in accordance with law. 8. Learned counsel for respondent no.1 opposed present petition contending that out of the four cases pending before 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur, two cases are part heard cases and therefore, there is no propriety in transferring the cases from the other courts to the said court or transferring the cases pending before 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur to any other court for disposal in accordance with law. It is submitted by the learned counsel for respondent no.1 that learned Sessions Judge as applied his mind while passing the order in Criminal Application No. 21/2012 preferred by the petitioner and rejected the said application rightly and submitted that no interference is called for in the present petition and consequently, urged that present petition be dismissed. 9. I have perused the contents of the present petition and its annexures and heard rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. 10. 9. I have perused the contents of the present petition and its annexures and heard rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. 10. At the outset, there is no dispute that in all six cases were pending at the time of filing of the petition between the parties and by way of amendment one more case was added therein and accordingly, in all seven cases are pending between the parties presently. It is also apparent that said cases are pending between the same parties and arise out of the same transaction. Moreover, it is pertinent to note that petitioner has not demanded any particular court in which the cases should be transferred but the petitioner is ready to conduct the said cases before any court at Latur. In fact, it will be convenient for better appreciation of evidence if all the cases are clubbed together and to be tried before one court separately, in the interest of justice. It is also material to note that, earlier the petitioner has preferred Criminal M.A.No.35/2011 before the learned Sessions Court, Latur and same was allowed by the said court by order dated 14.10.2011 directing that STCC No.592/2011 pending before 6thJudicial Magistrate First Class, Latur be transferred to 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur for disposal in accordance with law. However, it appears that, subsequent application preferred by the applicant i.e. Criminal M.A.No.21/2012 was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Latur on 12.6.2012 for the same prayer in respect of other cases pending between the parties. Perhaps, the learned Sessions Judge, Latur felt that out of the four cases pending before 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur two cases were part heard. 11. Having comprehensive view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that since above referred cases are pending between the same parties and since said cases arise out of same transaction, it is necessary to transfer all the said cases before one court but to be tried separately in accordance with law for the better appreciation of evidence. Admittedly, four cases are pending before 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and one case is pending before 10th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur, one case is pending before 9th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and one case is pending before 8th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur. Admittedly, four cases are pending before 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and one case is pending before 10th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur, one case is pending before 9th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and one case is pending before 8th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur. Therefore, it would be convenient for parties and witnesses and expedient for ends of justice to withdraw the cases before 8th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur; 9th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur ; and 10th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur respectively and to transfer the same before 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur but to be tried separately in accordance with law. 12. In the result, present petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ and ‘C’ thereof and it is directed that STCC No.153/2012 pending before 10th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and STCC No. 1574/2011 pending before 9th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur and STCC No.646/2012 pending before 8th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur be withdrawn from the said respective courts and be transferred to 4th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur to be tried separately in accordance with law and hearing of the said cases be conducted expeditiously and present petition stands disposed of accordingly. 13. RULE is made absolute in the aforesaid terms.