Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2017 Supreme(SC) 1104

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.K. Agrawal, Abhay Manohar Sapre, JJ.
Chirag M. Pathak & Ors. Etc. Etc. – Appellants
Versus
Dollyben Kantilal & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos.1947-1956 of 2017 (Arising Out of SLP (Crl) Nos. 1218-1227 of 2014) With Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 869-878 of 2014
Decided On : 15-11-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :- Varinder Kumar Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondents:- Ms. Puja Sharma, (M/S. Lawyer S Knit & Co), Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINTS
High Court exercising inherent jurisdiction u/s 482 CrPC cannpt analyzing materials on record as an appellate court.
A second FIR can be quashed if sheer absurdity in the allegations is noticed and when no prima facie cognizable case is made out. The second FIR can also be quashed if prima facie cognizable case is disclosed but there is remarkable identity between the two FIRs as if the first FIR is filed second time with no change in allegations.

Headnote:(a) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – High Court analyzing materials on record as an appellate court – Not permissible. (Para 18, 24)
       (b) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – All six FIRs pertaining to different societies and different land deals involving different persons – FIRs not overlapping on one another and merging in first FIR – Quashing of the later five FIRs held unjustified. (Para 22, 23)
       (c) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – Second FIR – Can be quashed if sheer absurdity in the allegations is noticed and when no prima facie cognizable case is made out – Alternatively, prima facie cognizable case is disclosed but there is remarkable identity between the two FIRs as if the first FIR is filed second time with no change in allegations then also the second FIR can be quashed. (Para 25)
       AIR 1982 SC 949 – Relied upon
       Facts of the case:
       Six FIRs were registered in different Police Stations in the State of Gujarat against six different Co-Operative Housing Societies for commission of various offences alleged to have been committed by the President, Office Bearers and other persons of the six Societies under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471,120-B and 477-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
       The accused (respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 herein, who are members of one family), felt aggrieved by the registration of the five FIRs (2 to 6) which had implicated them for commission of several offences, filed Criminal Applications seeking quashing of the five FIRs.
       The contention of the accused persons before the High Court was that the subsequent registration of five FIRs after registration of first one was nothing but repetition of first FIR inasmuch as all the five FIRs are founded on the same allegations.
       It was urged that once the investigation in respect of first FIR is over and charge-sheet pursuant thereto is filed in the concerned Court, it would take care of remaining five FIRs and it is for this reason the remaining five FIRs are wholly uncalled for.
       The High Court found merit in the contention of the accused persons and quashed the five FIRs.
       Finding of the Court:
       Impugned judgment is not sustainable.
       Result: SLPs disposed of.

Judgement Key Points

<|channel>thought <sentence rank="1" In our considered opinion, it is only when on reading the FIR, a sheer absurdity in the allegations is noticed and when no prima facie cognizable case is made out on its mere reading due to absurdity in the allegations or when facts disclose prima facie cognizable case and also disclose remarkable identity between the two FIRs as if the first FIR is filed second time with no change in allegations then the Court may, in appropriate case, consider it proper to quash the second FIR [25]. <sentence rank="2" The High Court, in exercise of its powers under Section 482 of the Code, cannot undertake a detailed examination of the facts contained in the FIRs by acting as an Appellate Court and draws its own conclusion [24]. <sentence rank="3" If on a consideration of the relevant materials, the Court is satisfied that an offence is disclosed, the Court will normally not interfere with the investigation into the offence and will generally allow the investigation in the offence to be completed for collecting materials for proving the offence (!) . <sentence rank="4" The condition precedent to the commencement of investigation under S.157 of the Code is that the F.I.R. must disclose, prima facie, that a cognizable offence has been committed (!) . <sentence rank="5" We find that the High Court had labored hard when it devoted 46 pages in examining the factual issues involved in six cases, appreciated the allegations of FIRs like an Appellate Court to some extent and then reached to a conclusion that all the six FIRs were based on identical facts and the allegations contained therein overlap and, therefore, the first FIR alone will survive for investigation whereas remaining five FIRs would not survive and merge in the first FIR [18].

JUDGMENT

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

Leave granted.

2. These appeals are filed by appellants against the common judgment dated 17.10.2013 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Special Criminal Application Nos.1265, 1266, 1267, 1268, 1269, 2930, 2931, 2932, 2933 and 2934 of 2013 whereby the High Court allowed the applications filed by the respondents herein under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") and quashed the five First Information Report (in short "the FIR") Nos.50/2013, 51/2013, 52/2013, 53/2013 and 54/2013 dated 19th February, 2013.

3. Facts of the case and the issues involved in these appeals are short. They, however, need mention hereinbelow to appreciate the controversy.

4. Six FIRs were registered in different Police Stations in the State of Gujarat against six different Co-Operative Housing Societies for commission of various offences alleged to have been committed by the President, Office Bearers and other persons of the six Societies under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471,120-B and 477-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC"). The details of these six FIRs are as under:

Sr. No.	Date & FIR No.	Name & Regn. of Society	Survey No. & Village	Period & Place of offence	Name of accused	Name of victims
1	CR 1-5/2 012 dated 21.5.2 012 registered with Gandhi Nagar CID Crime PS	Balasinor Society - Plot No.A/71 GH-11136	S. No.320, 320/1, 329, 332 Village – Pipaliya	Since 1984 to till 21.5.12	Kantilal Ambalal Patel, Dollyben Kantilal Patel, Ashok Desaibhai Patel, Sachin Rajendra Patel, Haresh Shashikant Patel, Jashbhai Shankerbhai Patel	Ranjitrai Joshi
2	C.R.I-50/2013 dated 19.2.2013 registered with Makar pura P.S. Vadodara	Balasinor Society GH-11136	S. No. 320, 320/1, 329, 332 Village-Pipaliya Area- 1, 14, 426, sq. mt.	20.7.11 to 28.9.11 at 60, Vimal Society, Makar-pura	Kantilal Ambalal Patel, Dollyben Kantilal Patel, Haresh Shashikant Patel, Vikas Ramesh-more Chandubhai, Jashbhai Shankerbhai Patel	Kanchanlal Bhatt, Arvind Kanchanlal Bhatt, Vasant R. Chavda, Indiraben Ratilal Adhiya, Manjulaben Arvind kumar Shah, Nainaben Suresh Kumar Parikh, Jasvantbhai Kodarlal Parikh, Usnas Navin Chandra Kacheriya Ravjibhai A. Patel, Bipin Chandra A. Patel, Parixit Ambalal Patel, Naresh kumar C. Patel, Kanubhai A. Vyas, Ratilal A. Patel, Sunil kumar Prem kumar Jethmalani, Rekha S. Patel
3	C.R.I-51/2013 dt. 19.2.13 registered with Makar pura P.S. Vadodara	Valkeshwar Society GH-11133	S.No.45 & 47 Village Kamlapura Area-49, 979 sq. mt.	15.7.11 to 29.9.11 at 60, Vimal Society, Makar-pura	Kantilal Ambalal Patel, Dollyben Kantilal Patel, Sachin Rajendra Anuben, Chandubhai, Jashbhai Shankerbhai Patel	Dhananjay Vallabhbhai Patel, Jayaben A. Patel, Mayank N. Patel, Nikhilharsukhray Bhatt, Dipa Koradiya, Jayvantiben Sevantilal Vaan Hansaben Ratilal Shah, Jayshree Suresh Chandra Shah, Amita Piyushbhai Parikh, Pragnaben Manojbhai Mehta, Bachubbhai A. Patel, Haresh B. Brahmbhatt, Mukesh, C Patel, Kokila A.Patel, Rajesh M. Patel, Babubhai S. Patel, Arvindbhai P.Amin, Prakashbhai Ishwarbhai Patel, Bipinchandra Ambalal Patel
4	C.R.I-52/2013 dt. 19.2.13 registered with Makar pura P.S. Vadodara	Parla Society GH-11134	S.No.54 Village Kamlapura Area-69, 706 sq. mt.	13.7.11 to 29.9.11 at 60, Vimal Society, Makar-pura	Kantilal Ambalal Patel, Dollyben Kantilal Patel, Jitendra Shashikant Patel Bhanuben Kantilal Patel Jashbhai Shankarbhai Patel	Prem kumar Jagtram Jethmalani, Hansaben V. Thakkar, Vidyaben N. Patel, Champaben S. Patel, Sureshbhai A. Vyas Sumanbhai A. Patel, Balkrushna M. Pandya, Narmadaben M. Patel, Sarojben C Patel, Arvindbhai M. Shah
5	C.R.I-53/2013 dt. 19.2.13 registered with Makar pura P.S. Vadodar

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2017 Supreme(SC) 1104

Cases Referred (1)