JUDGMENT : (Arun Monga, J.) 1. Above titled two petitions are with common prayer seeking the clubbing of multiple FIRs registered against the petitioners at different police stations in State of Rajasthan. Allegations are mismanagement, embezzlement, and financial irregularities in conducting the affairs of registered society namely Creative Credit Corporation Society Limited (Society- for short). The petitioners/accused were at the helm of affairs of the society at the relevant time. 2. The FIRs have been registered on the complaint of the subsequent management of which the complainants are currently the executive members. It appears that almost each executive member has lodged an independent FIR based on similar facts and allegations at different police stations. More of it later. 3. Before adverting to the merits of the case, it would be apposite to have a look at the relevant facts leading to the institution of the present petitions. For convenience, the recitals and narrative herein is taken from S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.1732/2023, which is as below:- 3.1. Creative Credit Cooperative Society was registered under the provisions of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act about 17 years ago. It is governed as per its bye-laws framed as per the provisions of the Act. It has got a Board of Directors elected by its members. The Society is in business of accepting financial deposits contributed by its members, which money is in turn then utilized for lending to those of the members who seek loans as per the bye-laws. 3.2. On account of Covid-19, loanee members of the Society defaulted in serving the debts. All such loans thus turned into Non Performing Assets (NPA). In fact, during the Covid-19 period, under the orders passed by competent government authorities, the society was restrained from causing recovery of debts from its borrowers for 6 months. Resultantly, Society plunged into serious financial hardship and was unable to pay back to its depositors when they sought refund of their deposits. Approximately 159 criminal complaints were filed under Section 138 of the N.I. Act by the depositors/members of the society, which are sub judice. On the other hand, society has filed around 195 recovery proceedings against the borrowers which too are pending. 3.3. Since the Society was unable to pay the depositors/members, a General Meeting of the Members was called, wherein it was decided to liquidation of the Society. 3.4. On the other hand, society has filed around 195 recovery proceedings against the borrowers which too are pending. 3.3. Since the Society was unable to pay the depositors/members, a General Meeting of the Members was called, wherein it was decided to liquidation of the Society. 3.4. The Society then filed a writ petition (SBCWP No.17943/2021) before this Court, wherein vide order dated 11.01.2022 directions were given to the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, to expeditiously decide the liquidation application filed by the Society. However, the liquidation application is still pending till date. In the meanwhile, the depositors/members of the Society lodged several FIRs against the petitioners, who were in the erstwhile management of the society at the relevant time. 4. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor and have perused the case file and gone through the nature of allegations contained in the different FIRs as enumerated in both the petitions. 5. My attention has been drawn to a judgment/order rendered in Vikram Singh v. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1479/2023 dated 23.08.2024 by a coordinate Bench of this Court presided over by my learned brother Farzand Ali, J., wherein somewhat similar money dispute pertaining to another Society namely Sanjivani Credit Cooperative Society is involved. Relevant of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:- “23. While considering the rights of the accused, this Court also needs to consider a smooth and flawless trial, preventing errors in the criminal proceedings in every corner. If, in any case, the present situation sustains, it shall result in a miscarriage of justice. Conducting so many trials simultaneously as well as investigations at the same time where the accused and the nature of charge is the same, shall be burdensome, causing disturbance to the administration and procedural laws and would infringe the fundamental rights of the accused as well. It would be pertinent to mention here the most important aspect of this case is that, in most of the cases, the trial has not been commenced yet. From the facts and circumstances mentioned above it can be speculated or presumed that conclusion of the trials against the accused/petitioner in 259 cases would take around 50 years. The average life expectancy of a human being, in general prudence, is 70 to 80 years. From the facts and circumstances mentioned above it can be speculated or presumed that conclusion of the trials against the accused/petitioner in 259 cases would take around 50 years. The average life expectancy of a human being, in general prudence, is 70 to 80 years. The present age of the petitioner is already around 45 years, and for 5 years, he has been behind bars in more than 250 cases pending against him. Not even in a single case under the BUDS Act has had a trial initiated. Can a Constitutional Court allow an accused to let die in prison while battling with vicious cycle of the criminal procedure without hope of a culmination of trial? No, never. Therefore, this court feels that the place and forum of trial/inquiry investigation of the cases should be transferred and the total number of cases be clubbed together in some groups, based on the geographical status of their lodging, then the purpose of speedy as well as fair trial can be achieved and the ends of justice be secured.” 6. I am in respectful agreement with the above views expressed by my learned brother. Having perused the judgment ibid in light of the factual narrative involved in the petitions herein, the case of the petitioners appears to be squarely covered by the reasoning noted in the judgment ibid. In the premise, I see no reason why the benefit thereof be not given to the petitioners herein. 7. Moreover, clubbing of the FIRs will also reduce the financial drain on the state exchequer as well as cut down the administrative burden, especially given that all the cases arise out of same or similar cause. 8. Adverting to whether under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS – for short), this Court can pass an order of transfer of the criminal cases for trial to other Courts which do not have territorial jurisdiction to try the offence, but otherwise competent to try such offences. The answer is not far to seek. Reference may be had to Section 447 of BNSS, sub section (1) thereof is self-explanatory and for ready reference is reproduced as below :- “447. Power of High Court to transfer cases and appeals. The answer is not far to seek. Reference may be had to Section 447 of BNSS, sub section (1) thereof is self-explanatory and for ready reference is reproduced as below :- “447. Power of High Court to transfer cases and appeals. (1) Whenever it is made to appear to the High Court - (a) that a fair and impartial inquiry or trial cannot be had in any Criminal Court subordinate thereto; or (b) that some question of law of unusual difficulty is likely to arise; or (c) that an order under this section is required by any provision of this Sanhita, or will tend to the general convenience of the parties or witnesses, or is expedient for the ends of justice, it may order - (i) that any offence be inquired into or tried by any Court not qualified under Sections 197 to 205 (both inclusive), but in other respects competent to inquire into or try such offence; (ii) that any particular case or appeal, or class of cases or appeals, be transferred from a Criminal Court subordinate to its authority to any other such Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction; (iii) that any particular case be committed for trial to a Court of Session; or (iv) that any particular case or appeal be transferred to and tried before itself.” 9. A bare perusal of the section, ibid, leaves no manner of doubt that a High Court has the discretionary power to transfer cases from one criminal court to another within its jurisdiction. Such transfers can be done to make proceedings more convenient for those involved i.e. complainant, accused, witnesses and the prosecution. 10. As an upshot of the discussion, it is directed to club/consolidate all the FIRs, as tabulated here in below :- S.No. FIR No. Year P.S., District 1. 0392 2022 Sumerpur, Pali 2. 0390 2022 Sumerpur, Pali 3. 0421 2022 Sumerpur, Pali 4. 0347 2022 Sumerpur, Pali 5. 0566 2022 Sumerpur, Pali 6. 0571 2022 Sumerpur, Pali 7. 0572 2022 Sumerpur, Pali 8. 0570 2022 Sumerpur, Pali 9. 0524 2022 Sumerpur, Pali 10. 0292 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 11. 0276 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 12. 0282 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 13. 0227 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 14. 0337 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 15. 0220 2021 Rani, Pali 16. 0042 2023 Rani, Pali 17. 0043 2023 Rani, Pali 18. 0153 2022 Rani, Pali 19. 0044 2023 Rani, Pali 20. 0570 2022 Sumerpur, Pali 9. 0524 2022 Sumerpur, Pali 10. 0292 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 11. 0276 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 12. 0282 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 13. 0227 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 14. 0337 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 15. 0220 2021 Rani, Pali 16. 0042 2023 Rani, Pali 17. 0043 2023 Rani, Pali 18. 0153 2022 Rani, Pali 19. 0044 2023 Rani, Pali 20. 0526 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 21. 0527 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 22. 0528 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 23. 0529 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 24. 0536 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 25. 0537 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 26. 0538 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 27. 0540 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 28. 0541 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 29. 0552 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 30. 0554 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 31. 0555 2023 Sumerpur, Pali 11. In order to ensure seamless clubbing, learned District and Sessions Judge, Pali is requested to make necessary arrangements by summoning the files/entire record from the places where they are pending presently, so as to immediately send all the material of the cases to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali for further trial. Once the FIRs are clubbed as above, the earliest of the FIR shall be treated as the principal FIR and the further trial shall proceed in the same accordingly. 12. The instant order is not be construed, in any manner, as an expression of opinion on the merits of the allegations levelled in the various FIRs. 13. In the parting, I may hasten to note here that in course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners earnestly also urged that all the FIRs since arise out of same cause and deserve to be clubbed together, therefore, a common bail order be passed by this court in all these instead of the petitioners running from pillar to post in each and every FIR to seek separate bail. 14. The said prayer is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. He insists that individual bail order must be secured in each and every FIR. 15. In this context, reference may be had to Supreme Court judgment rendered in Abhishek Singh Chauhan vs. Union of India & Ors., Writ Petition (Criminal) No.40/2022, dated 13.07.2022, same being relevant, is reproduced hereinbelow:- “In other words, all cases in the State of Maharashtra will stand clubbed with FIR No.552/2016 dated 15.04.2016, registered with Police Station Ramnagar, Chandrapur, and to be tried by Special Court at Chandrapur (Maharashtra). Similarly, all criminal cases arising fro the FIRs filed at the different point of time in the State of Madhya Pradesh will stand clubbed with FIR No.915/2026 dated 09.11.2016, registered with Police Station Kotwali, Sehore – to be tried by Special Court, Sehore (Madhya Pradesh); and in the State of Chattisgarh on the same line will sand clubbed with FIR No.146/2017 dated 04.04.2017 registered with Police Station Surajpur – to be tried by Special Court at Surajpur (Chhattisgarh). If the accused has been granted bail in connection with the principal FIR or criminal case arising therefrom, in which the other FIRs/criminal cases will stand clubbed/merged in terms of this order, the bail so granted must enure in his favour until the Court of competent jurisdiction cancels the same owing to supervening circumstances including breach of bail conditions. In case, no bail has been granted in the principal FIR (case), the appellant may apply for the same before the jurisdictional court competent to try the principal crime. That be decided on its own merits. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.” 16. Accordingly, guided by the Supreme Court judgment, ibid, the instant set of two petitions is partly allowed with liberty to apply for bail in the principal FIR, once all the FIRs are clubbed. It is directed that the outcome of such a bail petition shall govern the fate of bails be in all the other FIRs which have been clubbed together. 17. All pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.