Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Mohammad Hisham Osmani, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking quashing of FIR No. 321 of 2016 registered at City Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad, for offences punishable under Sections 420, 425, 465, 468, 471, 204, 417, 120-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The dispute pertained to ancestral land Gat No. 11 admeasuring 2H 3R located at village Georai, Taluka Aurangabad. The respondent No. 2, Rafique Ahmed, alleged that the father of the applicant had executed a sale deed of the land in favour of one Yusuf Ali Kurban Hussain by way of security. After the death of Yusuf Ali, his son Mohd. Yusuf Ahmed pursued mutation of his name in revenue records, which was allowed by the Tahsildar despite objections from respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 2 had earlier filed a private complaint (Criminal M.A. No. 2247 of 2014) which led to the registration of FIR No. 271 of 2014 under the same sections. That FIR was investigated and a B-summary report was submitted, and the private complaint was dismissed. Subsequently, the respondent No. 2 filed another complaint leading to the impugned FIR No. 321 of 2016, which was based on the same set of allegations. The applicant contended that the second FIR was not maintainable as it was a repetition of the earlier FIR and amounted to an abuse of the process of law. The court examined the records and found that the allegations in both FIRs were identical. The court held that registration of a second FIR for the same offence and same set of facts is not permissible under the scheme of the CrPC. The inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC must be exercised to prevent abuse of process and to secure the ends of justice. Accordingly, the court quashed FIR No. 321 of 2016 and all proceedings arising therefrom. The application was allowed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Inherent Powers - Section 482 CrPC - Quashing of FIR - Second FIR on same allegations - The court examined whether a subsequent FIR (No.321/2016) based on identical allegations as earlier FIR (No.271/2014) could be sustained. Held that registration of second FIR for the same offence and same set of facts is not permissible and amounts to abuse of process of law. The earlier FIR had been investigated and a B-summary report was submitted, and the private complaint was dismissed. Therefore, the subsequent FIR was quashed. (Paras 1-10) B) Criminal Procedure Code - Investigation - Section 156(3) CrPC - Magistrate's directions - The earlier FIR was registered on the directions of the learned Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC in a private complaint. The court noted that the subsequent FIR was registered without any fresh material and was a clear attempt to circumvent the earlier proceedings. Held that such practice is deprecated and the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC must be exercised to prevent abuse. (Paras 2-8) C) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Offences - Sections 420, 425, 465, 468, 471, 204, 417, 120-B r/w 34 IPC - Allegations of cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy - The court found that the allegations in both FIRs were identical, relating to the same land transaction and same parties. Since the earlier FIR had been closed and the complaint dismissed, the subsequent FIR could not be allowed to proceed. Held that continuation of such proceedings would be oppressive and unjust. (Paras 3-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a second FIR can be registered and investigated for the same set of allegations and the same offence as an earlier FIR, and whether such subsequent FIR amounts to an abuse of the process of law liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
Final Decision
The court allowed the application and quashed FIR No. 321 of 2016 registered at City Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad, and all proceedings arising therefrom.
Law Points
- Second FIR on same facts is not maintainable
- Inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process
- Principle of estoppel by record
- Bar of subsequent FIR for same offence
