Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
L. S. PIRZADA
Patel Ratilal Ambalal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
L. S. Pirzada, J.
1. The present revision application has been filed by the applicant–original accused no. 2 under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short “Cr.P.C.”) challenging the order dated 29.03.2007 passed by the learned Principal Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kadi in Inquiry Case No. 14 of 2006, whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences and ordered issuance of non-bailable warrants against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The learned Magistrate has further directed the Registry to register the case by assigning a new criminal case number and ordered that Criminal Case No. 482 of 2005 be amalgamated with the present complaint and that both matters be tried together.
2. The factual background leading to the filing of the present revision application is that respondent No. 2 – the original complainant lodged an FIR being C.R. No. I-99 of 2004 at Kadi Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135
A second complaint for the same incident is not maintainable unless it discloses a distinct offence or presents new material, reaffirming the principle against double jeopardy.
The main legal point established is that a second complaint on the same allegations can only be entertained in exceptional circumstances and when the core of both complaints is not the same.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a second complaint on the same facts should be entertained only in exceptional circumstances, as per legal principles established in previous ....
A second FIR is maintainable if it involves distinct allegations not covered in a prior FIR, even if both arise from the same factual circumstance.
A subsequent criminal complaint based on the same facts as a previously accepted final report is not maintainable unless exceptional circumstances are shown; mere acceptance of a final report does no....
A second FIR is permissible if it presents a different version of the same incident, allowing for new discoveries to be considered.
An order summoning an accused in a criminal case is not an interlocutory order and revision is maintainable. The Magistrate must apply his mind to the facts of the case and law governing the issue an....
A second narazi complaint on the same facts is maintainable under exceptional circumstances, and the right of the complainant to file a narazi complaint is irrespective of whether the final report wa....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
