The registration of multiple FIRs for the same incident violates principles established by the Supreme Court, asserting they are impermissible under Article 21 and an abuse of process.

ORDER :

1. The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“…to issue any vmt or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in registering multiple firs with regard to the same incident and registering FIR.No.166 of 2025 dt. 22.04.2025 on the file of Duwada Police Station Visakhapatnam and FIR No.85 of 2025 dt.01.05.2025 on the file of Dwaraka Police Station Visakhapatnam as illegal arbitrary and violative of articles 14, 20 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently quash the FIRs against the petitioner including FIR No.166 of 2025 dt.22.04.2025 on the file of Duwada Police Station Visakhapatnam and transfer all other complaints against Sneha Mutually Aided Cooperative Society Ltd SNEHA MACS LTD where the FIR No.166 of 2025 is registered before Duwada Police Station Visakhapatnam treating the said subsequent complainants as witnesses and to pass such orders….”

2. The writ petition is filed by the petitioner, aged about 71 years, who has been arrayed as Accused No. 3 in Crime No. 166 of 2025, registered on 22.01.2025 at Duvvada Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate, for the offences punishable under Sections 406 , 411, 414 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, ‘the IPC ’), and Sections 21(1), 21(2), 21(3) and 23 of the Telangana Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act (TBUDS), and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘the I.P.C’).

3. At the behest of one Peerubandi Prakasa Rao, the de-facto complainant, a case in Crime No. 85 of 2025 was registered by the Station House Officer, Dwaraka Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate, on 01.05.2025 for the very same offences, viz., Sections 406 , 411, 414 and 120- B of “the IPC .,’ Sections 21(1), 21(2), 21(3) and 23 of ‘the TBUDS Act.,’ and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, read with Section 34 of ‘the .,’ in which also the petitioner was shown as Accused No. 3

4. Sri Ganta Ramarao, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri G. R. Sudhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that in both the complaints, the de-facto complainants have arrayed the entire Board of Directors and staff of Sneha MACS Ltd., as accused. He submits that Sneha MACS Ltd., was established in the year 2008 and that the petitioner was appointed as Director/CEO only in the year 2022, pursuant to deposits made by him and his family members to a tune of approximately Rs.2 crores. He further submits that in the year 2024, a few depositors complained of non- payment of their deposits on maturity and that, solely in view of his official capacity as CEO of Sneha MACS Ltd., the petitioner was arrayed as Accused No. 3 and attempts were made to apprehend him. Sri Ganta Rama Rao, learned Senior Counsel further submitted that a notice under Section 41 -A of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ was issued to the petitioner on 13.05.2025 in FIR No. 85 of 2025. Since certain offences alleged against him are punishable with imprisonment exceeding seven years, efforts were nevertheless made to arrest him. Consequently, the petitioner filed a pre-arrest bail petition in Crl.P. No. 6585 of 2025, and this Court, by order dated 24.07.2025, granted pre- arrest bail to him subject to certain conditions. It is also submitted that two quash petitions, namely Crl.P. Nos. 6863 of 2025 and 6861 of 2025, were filed before this Court challenging the registration of FIR No. 16