Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(All) 3716

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SAMEER JAIN, J.
Chandrashekhar Alias Ravan – Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. and Another - Opposite Parties
Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 39434 of 2025 with Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 39425 of 2025 With Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 39419 of 2025 With Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 39417 of 2025
Decided On : 17-12-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant : Nidhi, Sushil Shukla
For the Opposite Parties : G.A.

Subsequent FIRs may be permissible if they relate to distinct incidents or reveal new findings, even if arising from the same transaction.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 154, 156 - Subsequent FIRs arising from the same transaction - Applicant sought to quash multiple FIRs lodged after an initial FIR related to the same disturbance - Court held that subsequent FIRs, although related to a similar incident, can be permissible if they reveal different aspects or new findings of the incident - The critical analysis involved examining whether the incidents were distinct in nature - Decisions referenced: T.T. Antony Vs. State of Kerala, Babubhai Vs. State of Gujarat, Nirmal Singh Kahlon Vs. State of Punjab, and Surendra Singh Rathore Vs. State of Rajasthan. (Paras 1-47)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Quashing proceedings - Standard for quashing multiple FIRs laid down by the Supreme Court emphasizes necessity of distinct facts for each FIR - In this case, the court ruled against quashing as all FIRs showcased varied incidents though they formed part of the same event on the same day - Court emphasizes the importance of ongoing investigations and testimonies already presented. (Paras 1-47)

Table of Content
1. applicant's multiple applications based on firs consolidated for common hearing. (Para 1 , 3)
2. arguments presented regarding the validity of subsequent firs. (Para 4 , 24)
3. distinctions made in legality of firs under criminal law standards. (Para 20 , 29)
4. court's interpretation of fir validity in context of the same incident. (Para 35 , 38 , 41)
5. final dismissal of the applications based on comprehensive analysis. (Para 46)

JUDGMENT :

SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. As, all these matters relate to applicant Chandrashekhar @ Ravan and prayers made in all these applications are arising out of FIR No. 152 of 2017, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur and similar issue is involved in all these matters, therefore, these applications are being heard and disposed off by a common order.

2. Heard Sri Sushil Shukla, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Nidhi, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Manish Goyal, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Roopak Chaubey, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

3. By way of instant applications applicant made the following prayers:-

"i. To quash the charge-sheet No. 31 of 2017 and proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1477 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No. 154 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 435 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur and impugned order 12.09.2025 passed by Special Magistrate MP/MLA Court/ACJM-IV Saharanpur.

ii. To quash the charge-sheet No. 33 of 2017 dated 17.07.2017 and proceedings of Session Trial No. 212 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 156 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 452, 436, 427 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur and pending in the court of Special Judge MP/MLA Court/ADJ- 12th Saharanpur.

iii. To quash the charge-sheet No. 39 of 2017 dated 29.07.2017and proceedings of Session Trial No. 214 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 162 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 332, 353, 436, 427 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and 3/4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur pending in the court of Special Judge MP/MLA Court/ADJ-12th Saharanpur.

iv. To quash the charge-sheet No. 38 of 2017 dated 29.07.2017 and proceedings of Session Trial No. 216 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 163 of 2017, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 323, 325, 395, 332, 353, 352, 435, 427 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur pending in the court of Special Judge MP/MLA Court/ADJ-12th Saharanpur."

"Alternatively, above charge-sheets may be considered as supplementary charge- sheets of the charge-sheet No. 32 of 2017 dated 17.07.2017 relating to Case Crime No. 152 of 2017, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur."

Arguments advanced on behalf of applicant:

4. Learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of applicant submits, applicant is sitting M.L.A. from Nageena Constituency District Saharanpur and on 09.05.2017 a FIR was lodged against 19 known and some unknown persons at P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Kanpur vide Case Crime No. 152 of 2017 at 17.30 hours with regard to the incident occurred on 09.05.2017 at 13.45 hours under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 332, 336, 427, 436, 353, 323 IPC, Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section ¾ Public Property Damages Act.

5. He further submits, after registration of the first FIR at Case Crime No. 152 of 2017, four other FIRs were also lodged on same day i.e. on 09.05.2017 with regard to same incident at Case Crime Nos. 154 of 2017, 156 of 2017, 162 of 2017 and 163 of 2017.

6. He next submits, in all the cases applicant is one of the accused and by way of instant applications applicant made a prayer to quash the charge- sheets arsing out of subsequent FIRs relating to Case Crime Nos. 154 of 2017, 156 of 2017, 162 of 2017 and 163 of 2017 on the ground that these FIRs are subsequent to the FIR relating to