JUDGMENT 1. - All these three misc. petitions are decided by this common order as they involve common question of law. 2. These misc. petitions have been preferred by the petitioner seeking consolidation of three criminal cases registered against him for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for the bouncing of four cheques held by the respondent Roop Chand. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that all the four cheques in relation whereto three separate complaints have been filed have been issued in the year 2007 i.e. to say all the three cases relate to the offence of the same kind having been committed within a period of one year. It is submitted that in each of three complaints, reference has been made to all the four cheques and thus, by virtue of Section 219 Cr.P.C., the complaints should be directed to be consolidated. In support of his contention, learned counsel has placed reliance upon the judgments of this Court rendered in the cases of (1) Bhadar Ram and Ors. v. State and Ors. reported in 2008(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 297 and (2) Kamal Garg v. State and Anr. reported in 2008(1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 459. 4. Per contra, counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer made by the counsel for petitioner and submits that the accused petitioner is trying to stall the proceedings and these misc. petitions have been filed just to delay the proceedings of the trial court. 5. I have considered the arguments advanced at the bar and have perused the orders impugned and the proceedings of the three complaints. 6. Admittedly, in this case, four cheques, for the bouncing of which the petitioner is being prosecuted, have been issued by the petitioner to the respondent in the year 2007. Thus, all the three complaints, which have been filed arise out of the bouncing of the cheques issued to the respondent for the same year. The complainant in all these cases is the same and in each of the complaint filed by the complainant, reference is made to all the four cheques. 7. The judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner are almost based on similar facts. 8. Resultantly, the present misc. The complainant in all these cases is the same and in each of the complaint filed by the complainant, reference is made to all the four cheques. 7. The judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner are almost based on similar facts. 8. Resultantly, the present misc. petitions succeed and now it is directed that the trial of the three complaints being Complaint No.228/2009, 229/2009 and 230/2009 titled as Roop Chand v. Chand Ratan pending in the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases), Bikaner shall be clubbed together and tried together. Since the cheques were issued in the year 2007, the learned Magistrate shall decide the same not later than six months. No frivolous applications filed on behalf of the either parties for delaying the trial shall be entertained. 9. Stay petitions also stand disposed of.Petition Allowed. *******