The Supreme Court recently comprising of a bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S Oka held, "If multiple first information reports by the same person against the same accused are permitted to be registered in respect of the same set of facts and allegations, it will result in the accused getting entangled in multiple criminal proceedings for the same alleged offence. Therefore, the registration of such multiple firs is nothing but abuse of the process of law".
The bench added that the act of the registration of such successive FIRs on the same set of facts and allegations at the instance of the same informant will not stand the scrutiny of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India.
Facts of the case
In the instant case, the accused had moved the Allahabad High Court seeking to quash the second FIR and submitted that both FIRs are based on the same cause of action and the same set of facts and therefore the registration of the second FIR is nothing but abuse of process of law.
However, Allahabad High Court dismissed the accused’s petition prompting him to move the Supreme Court.
Courts Observation and order
The bench at the very outset observed, "We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants who submitted that both the first and second FIRs are based on the same set of facts and the same cause of action. Relying upon decisions of this Court in the case of Upkar Singh v. Ved Prakash and T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala, the learned counsel submitted that registration of second FIR is a gross abuse of process of law."
The bench observed, "We have perused both the FIRs. The respondent no.4 is the first informant in both the FIRs and the same are based on the same agreement for sale executed on 14th June 2006. The allegation made in both the FIRs is the same. The allegation is that by practising forgery and fraud, the appellant no.1 has sold the subject property to appellant no.2 thereby deceiving the respondent no.4. The second FIR, which is the subject matter of challenge, was registered nearly four years after the first FIR was registered. The challenge to the first FIR is pending before the High Court. These aspects have been completely overlooked by the High Court in the impugned judgment."
The bench dismissing the appeal remarked, "if multiple First Information Reports by the same person against the same accused are permitted to be registered in respect of the same set of facts and allegations, it will result in the accused getting entangled in multiple criminal proceedings for the same alleged offence. Therefore, the registration of such multiple FIRs is nothing but abuse of the process of law. Moreover, the act of the registration of such successive FIRs on the same set of facts and allegations at the instance of the same informant will not stand the scrutiny of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. The settled legal position on this behalf has been completely ignored by the High Court. Accordingly, the appeal must succeed."
Read Judgment @LAtestlaws.com
Picture Source : https://miro.medium.com/max/700/1*smR6Qt26fhiJQB5LRfkWPw.jpeg
