The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of the First Information Report and the test of 'sameness' to determine the permissibility of multiple FIRs for the same occurrence.

JUDGMENT

Sashikanta Mishra, J. - In the present application filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner prays for quashment of Mahila Police Station, Bhubaneswar FIR No. 36 dated 27.03.2021 on the ground that another FIR on the self-same allegation was registered by Malkangiri Police Station vide FIR No. 106 dated 03.04.2021.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the husband of opposite party no.2, who lodged a written report before the S.P. Malkangiri on 18.03.2021 making some allegations against her husband and in-laws. The FIR was registered by IIC, Malkangiri P.S. on the direction of the S.P., Malkangiri as Malkangiri P.S. Case No.106 dated 03.04.2021 for the commission of offences under Sections 498- A/294/323/506/34 of IPC. The informant-opposite party no.2 also submitted another complaint on 27.03.2021 before the IIC of Mahila Police Station, Bhubaneswar against her husband and in-laws, which came to be registered as Mahila P.S. Case No. 36 dated 27.03.2021 for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 498- A/323/294/307/506/34 of IPC read with Section 4 of DP Act. Contending that the FIR lodged before the Mahila Police Station at Bhubaneswar, though registered on 27.03.2021 is actually the second FIR, the petitioner has filed this application seeking quashment of the same.

3. Heard Mr. L. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P.K. Maharaj, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State and Mr. B.P.B. Bahali, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2.

4. Before adverting to the facts of case, it would be apposite to refer to the position of law in the present context. Section 154 of Cr.P.C. provides for giving information to Police in cognizable cases, which could be oral or in writing. Such information is termed as 'First Information Report' and as the name suggests, is supposed to be the earliest information regarding the occurrence given to the police which sets the criminal law into motion. There is no provision in law permitting multiple information being given to police of the same occurrence.

In the case of T.T. Antony vs. State of Kerala reported in (2001) 6 SCC 181, the apex court held that second FIR for the self-same occurrence giving rise to one or more cognizable offences is not permissible. Again, referring to the ratio laid down in T.T. Antony (supra), the apex court in the case of Upkar Singh vs. Ved Prakash reported in (2004) 13 SCC 292 explained the legal position further as under:

'17. It is clear from the words emphasised hereinabove in the above quotation, this Court in the case of T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala has not excluded the registration of a complaint in the nature of a counter-case from the purview of the Code. In our opinion, this Court in that case only held that any further complaint by the same complainant or others against the same accused, subsequent to the registration of a case, is prohibited under the Code because an investigation in this regard would have already started and further complaint against the same accused will amount to an improvement on the facts mentioned in the original complaint, hence will be prohibited under Section 162 of the Code. This prohibition noticed by this Court, in our opinion, does not apply to counter-complaint by the accused in the first complaint or on his behalf alleging a different version of the said incident.

5. When in a given fact situation, more than one FIR apparently relating to the same occurrence has been registered, what recourse is to be taken has been explained by the apex court in the case of Anju Choudhury vs. State of U.P. & Anr., reported in (2013) 6 SCC 384 In the said case, the apex court held as under:

'23. The First Information Report is a very important document, besides that it sets the machinery of criminal law in motion. It is a very material document on which the entire case of the prosecution is built. Upon registration of FIR, beginning of investigation in a case, collection