Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J.
Rajendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. failure of police to register fir. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. revisionist's application to register fir. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. details of the opposing party's actions and delays in filing complaints. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. legal arguments against non-registration of fir. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. arguments regarding the necessity of fir registration and legal obligations. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. counterarguments regarding the registration of multiple firs. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 7. court observations on the factual matrix and procedural aspects. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 8. analysis of the legal principles concerning fir registration. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 9. mandatory registration of fir upon cognizable offence. (Para 29 , 30) |
| 10. clarification on the legal standards for registering multiple firs. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 11. court allows revision and orders fir registration. (Para 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 12. final conclusion allowing the revision and setting aside the previous order. (Para 42) |
JUDGMENT :
Manjive Shukla, J.
1. Heard Sri Srijan Pandey and Sri Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned counsels appearing for the revisionist, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing
FIR registration is mandatory if a cognizable offence is disclosed, and second FIRs are permissible where informants and versions differ.
The mandatory nature of the provision for registration of a first information report under Section 154(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the discretion of the Magistrate in ordering the regist....
A second FIR is permissible if it presents a different version of the same incident, allowing for new discoveries to be considered.
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.
Revision maintainable against dismissal of Section 156(3) CrPC application; prior police complaints evidenced by postal receipts satisfy precondition; forgery to obtain scheme benefits discloses cogn....
The main legal point established is the mandatory registration of FIR if the information discloses a cognizable offence and the need for a preliminary inquiry in certain cases. The court emphasized t....
Point of Law : Magistrate while exercising powers under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. cannot act as a post office as the Magistrate has to apply his mind with regard to the fact as to whether the cas....
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
