Back
2018 Supreme(Pat) 838
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.
ANIL SINGH @ ANIL KUMAR SINGH - Appellant
Vs.
STATE OF BIHAR, THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA - Respondent
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1226 of 2018
Decided On : 31-08-2018
Ajay Kumar Thakur, Neelesh Kumar, P.K. Verma, Suman Kumar Jha, Advs.
Only one FIR can be registered for one act of violence at one single place of occurrence. Subsequent FIRs for the same offense are barred under Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
Headnote:
The court examined the maintainability of multiple FIRs for the same cognizable offense or occurrence. It held that subsequent FIRs for the same offense are barred under Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The court analyzed various judgments of the Supreme Court of India and the Patna High Court to establish the principle that only one FIR can be registered for one act of violence at one single place of occurrence. The court emphasized that the registration of multiple FIRs would amount to an abuse of power by the authorities and a tool of harassment for the accused.
Fact of the Case:
On 25th and 26th March 2018, several incidents of violence, arson, and looting took place in Aurangabad, Bihar, during a Ram Navmi procession. Multiple FIRs were registered for the same incidents, leading to allegations of misuse of power and harassment of the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the subsequent FIRs for the same offense are barred under Section 162 of the CrPC. It found that the multiple FIRs in this case were registered for the same set of offenses or the place of occurrence, which took place. The court emphasized that the registration of multiple FIRs would amount to an abuse of power by the authorities and a tool of harassment for the accused.
Issues: 1. Whether multiple FIRs can be registered for the same cognizable offense or occurrence? 2. Whether the registration of multiple FIRs amounts to an abuse of power and harassment of the accused?
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on several judgments of the Supreme Court of India and the Patna High Court to establish the principle that only one FIR can be registered for one act of violence at one single place of occurrence. The court held that the subsequent FIRs for the same offense are barred under Section 162 of the CrPC. The court emphasized that the registration of multiple FIRs would amount to an abuse of power by the authorities and a tool of harassment for the accused.
Final Decision: The court quashed the subsequent FIRs registered for the same incidents, except for the first FIR, which was registered for the initial incident of violence. The court directed that the accused would be liable to be investigated and proceeded against in accordance with law in the first case.
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.
This criminal writ application has been preferred for quashing of the first information report giving rise to Aurangabad Town P.S. Case No. 94 of 2018, 98 of 2018, 99 of 2018, 100 of 2018, 101 of 2018 and 102 of 2018 on the ground that for the alleged occurrence which took place on 25.03.2018 and 26.03.2018, two first information reports being Aurangabad Town P.S. Case No. 93 of 2018 and Aurangabad Town P.S. Case No. 95 of 2018 respectively have already been lodged, therefore, the subsequent F.I.Rs for the same occurrence would be hit by Section 162 Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.)
2. Learned counsel has taken this Court through the allegations made in the various written complaints lodged on 25.03.2018 and 26.03.2018 respectively. It is submitted that on 25.03.2018 while a procession of Ram Navmi was going on a person belonging to a religious community started throwing bricks and stone. Due to the attack on the procession when a kind of stampede took place for which Aurangabad P.S. Case No.93 of 2018 under Sections 147, 149, 504, 337, 427, 307, 160, 295(A) and 353 of Indian Penal Code was lodged at 6.00 P.M. but for the same part of occurrence whereunder after the procession was attacked and people dispersed and allegedly got involved in riot, looting and setting the shops on fire near Sadar Hospital a separate F.I.R. being Aurangabad Town P.S. Case No. 94 of 2018 was lodged on the same day at 07:30 P.M. Learned counsel has, therefore, sought quashing of the second F.I.R. lodged on 25.03.2018.
3. It is further submitted that again on 26.03.2018 when Ram Navmi procession was moving after taking permission from the administration, near Nawadih Road member of a particular religious community started throwing bricks causing injury to the person participating in the procession, thereafter the police used force, arrested 68 persons and the arrested persons named other 21 persons who were allegedly involved in the offence. It is alleged that the mob ransacked several shops. For the said incident one Ram Pravesh Prasad, Kanungo, Land Acquisition Office, Aurangabad lodged a written report against 89 named accused persons and 100 unknown persons giving rise to Aurngabad Town P.S. Case No. 95 of 2018 dated 26.03.2018. It appears that 68 persons were arrested by police and they disclosed the name of other 21 persons making it a total 89 named accused in this F.I.R. These seven petitioners are named accused, petitioner no.1 was arrested whereas others were named on disclosure by the arrested accused.
4. It is submitted that for the same incident another F.I.R. was instituted in Aurangabad Town police station by one Sunil Kumar, Laboure Enforcement Officer, Aurangabad naming 124 persons (including 89 accused of Case No. 95 of 2018) and several unknown giving rise to Aurangabad Town P.S. Case No. 97 of 2018 dated 28.03.2018. It is stated that he was deputed to maintain law and order by the District Magistrate on the occasion of Ram Navmi. According to him, on 26.03.2018 while the procession of Ram Navmi was going on at about 01:30 afternoon near Khatta Mitha Restaurant some miscreants started throwing stone on the procession and in the said F.I.R. he has mentioned that Aurangabad Town P.S. Case No. 95 of 2018 dated 26.03.2018 was earlier lodged. The 89 names mentioned in this F.I.R. are the same and one mentioned in F.I.R. No. 95 of 2018.
5. It is further stated that one Parmanand Singh, Junior Engineer, District Development Corporation, Aurangabad also lodged F.I.R. giving rise to Aurangabad Town P.S. Case No. 98 of 2018 dated 30.03.2018 in which also he has stated that on the order of the District Magistrate he was deputed to maintain law and order in the said Ram Navmi procession in which the alleged incident took place on 26.03.2018 and in the said F.I.R. he has named 130 persons including 89 person named in earlier two FIRs along with some others. In fact first part of the subsequent F.I.Rs take note o
