JUDGMENT Nirmaljit Kaur, J. - The present criminal misc. petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 challenging the order dated 08.03.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Jodhpur Metro vide which the revision petition filed by the petitioners was dismissed as well as the order dated 16.08.2017 passed by the Special Metropolitan Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.5, Jodhpur Metro vide which the application of the petitioners under Section 219 Cr.P.C., 1973 was rejected. 2. The only ground for clubbing all the three separate cases filed by the complainant under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the present petitioners and pending before the Court of Special Metropolitan Magistrate, Jodhpur Metro is that they are in relation to the same transactions, they all were dishonoured on the same date i.e. 17.01.2017 and the parties too are same. 3. Reply has been filed. 4. Heard. 5. A perusal of Section 219 Cr.P.C., 1973 shows that it does not apply to the summon cases as under Section 251 Cr.P.C., 1973 only the substance of accusation are read out. No formal charge is framed. In case no charges are to be framed, there is no requirement for clubbing of the cases as Section 219 Cr.P.C., 1973 applies only to warrant cases and not in summon cases where no charges are framed. 6. This Court in the case of Raj Kumar vs. Smt. Neelam Pathak & Anr. reported in 2012 (3) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1445 while relying on the judgments rendered in the cases of Vijay Dev & Ors. vs. Kailash Chand & Anr. reported in 2008 (2) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1206 and Nirmal Singh vs. Bhoj Raj reported in 2007 (2) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1710 dismissed the petition seeking clubbing of the cases filed under section 138 of the N.I. Act. 7. In view of the consistent view, this Court finds no ground to interfere in the well reasoned orders passed by the courts below. 8. Dismissed accordingly.