The cases cannot be tried together as a single case since the offences relates to different dates and different transactions, the judge pointed out. The units purchased and the purchasing firms were different. He made it clear that ``this court is not inclined to merge Jaya Publications and Sasi Enterprises by consolidating both as single case.''

Petitioner contended that both the cases emanated from a single complaint and on a single crime number. The accused in both the cases are one and the same persons. There could be no multifarious charges or cases.

The judge held that according to Sec 219 CrPC., three offences of the same kind committed within a year can be joined together.But the documents in these two cases showed that the units purchased were different. The prosecution found irregularities in their purchase. After investigating the matter, a positive police report was filed before the principal sessions judge, City Civil Court.

Subsequently, two former Secretaries to the State Government, N Narayanan and C Ramachandran, gave statements before the metropolitan magistrate. The statements revealed certain new facts in the purchase of TANSI properties. Hence, the prosecution filed a petition before the principal sessions judge and obtained permission for further investigation. After conducting further investigations, the CB-CID filed an additional chargesheet in respect of Karpoorasundarapandian, the then Additional Secretary to Jayalalitha, who was later cited as an accused.

The two separate chargesheets were taken on file by this court and there was no violation of law in filing more than one chargesheet in one crime number, the judge observed. The additional chargesheetcannot be taken as a supplementary one. No prejudice would be caused to the petitioner by filing separate chargesheets and separate trial as these are `distinct' offences, the judge said.