Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dayanand G. Narvekar, was the President of the Goa Cricket Association (GCA) during 2006-2007. The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) allotted Rs.11,52,91,206/- to GCA as TV subsidy. Allegations arose that the petitioner and other office bearers conspired to open a fraudulent bank account and siphon off the amount. A first FIR (Crime No.75/2016) was registered on 2/6/2016 based on a complaint by Mr. Vilas Desai, alleging misappropriation of Rs.2,87,00,000/- out of the total amount. Investigation was completed and a charge-sheet was filed, with trial pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class at Panaji. Subsequently, a second FIR (Crime No.142/2016) was registered based on a complaint by Mr. Nilesh Prabhudessai, alleging misappropriation of Rs.1 crore from the same total amount, specifically a cheque of Rs.1 crore dated 9/5/2006. The petitioner sought quashing of the second FIR under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 482 CrPC. The court examined whether a second FIR on the same set of facts could be maintained. The court noted that the amount of Rs.1 crore was part of the larger amount already covered in the first FIR. The prosecution argued that the second FIR was based on a different complainant and a specific cheque, but the court found no new material or distinct transaction. The court held that allowing a second FIR for the same cause of action would be an abuse of process and lead to parallel proceedings. The court quashed the second FIR and all proceedings arising therefrom, emphasizing that the remedy lies in the pending trial where all allegations can be considered.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Abuse of Process of Court - Second FIR on same set of facts without any new material is not maintainable and amounts to abuse of process of law - The court held that registration of a second FIR for the same alleged misappropriation of Rs.1 crore, which was part of the larger amount already covered in the first FIR, without any fresh material, is an abuse of process and liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC read with Article 226 of the Constitution (Paras 1-10). B) Criminal Procedure Code - Multiple FIRs - Same Cause of Action - Bar on second FIR for same offence - The court held that when a first FIR is already registered and charge-sheeted for misappropriation of a total amount, a second FIR for a part of that amount cannot be allowed to proceed as it would lead to parallel investigations and trials, causing prejudice to the accused (Paras 5-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a second FIR can be registered and investigated for the same alleged misappropriation of funds when a prior FIR on the same set of facts is already pending trial?
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition and quashed FIR No.142/2016 and all proceedings arising therefrom.
Law Points
- Second FIR on same facts without new material is abuse of process
- Quashing of FIR under Section 482 CrPC
- Article 226 of Constitution
- Doctrine of issue estoppel
- Bar on multiple FIRs for same cause of action
