Case Note & Summary
The applicants, Lalasaheb Rajesaheb Shaikh and Tabbsumbi Ismile Shaikh, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) before the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, seeking quashing of First Information Report (FIR) No. 361 of 2016 registered at Shivajinagar Police Station, Latur, for offences under Section 409 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The FIR was lodged by Dr. Ganpat Shankarrao More, Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Latur, alleging that applicant No.1, while serving as Head Master of a school, misappropriated funds of the Zilla Parishad by making false appointments and withdrawals, with the assistance of applicant No.2. The applicants contended that this FIR was a second FIR in respect of the same incident and transaction as Crime No. 9 of 2012, which had been registered earlier at the same police station on the complaint of one Hamid Sarwar Sahab Shaikh, pursuant to an order under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The earlier FIR also pertained to the same allegations of misappropriation of funds. The applicants argued that the registration of a second FIR on the same set of facts was impermissible and an abuse of process of law. The State respondents opposed the application, but the Court, after hearing the parties, found merit in the applicants' contention. The Court observed that the impugned FIR was indeed a second FIR based on the same transaction and incident as the earlier FIR, and its continuation would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, the Court allowed the application, quashed the impugned FIR No. 361 of 2016, and made the rule absolute.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Second FIR - Section 482 Cr.P.C. - The applicants sought quashing of FIR No. 361 of 2016 registered for offences under Section 409 read with Section 34 IPC on the ground that it was a second FIR in respect of the same transaction as Crime No. 9 of 2012. The Court held that registration of a second FIR on the same set of facts and incident is impermissible and an abuse of process of law, and accordingly quashed the impugned FIR. (Paras 2-5) B) Indian Penal Code - Criminal Breach of Trust - Section 409 IPC - The FIR alleged that applicant No.1, as Head Master, misappropriated funds of Zilla Parishad by making false appointments and withdrawals. The Court did not examine the merits of the allegation but focused on the procedural bar of second FIR. (Paras 3-4) C) Criminal Procedure Code - Inherent Powers - Section 482 Cr.P.C. - The Court exercised its inherent powers to quash the FIR to prevent abuse of process, as the second FIR was based on the same transaction as the earlier FIR. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether registration of a second FIR for the same offence and incident forming part of the same transaction as an earlier FIR is permissible in law and liable to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Final Decision
The Court allowed the application, quashed the impugned FIR No. 361 of 2016 registered at Shivajinagar Police Station, Latur, for offences under Section 409 read with Section 34 IPC, and made the rule absolute.
Law Points
- Second FIR on same facts and transaction is impermissible
- Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked to quash such FIR
- Criminal breach of trust
- Section 409 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
