Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Multiple FIRs for the same incident and their quashability - Generally, courts recognize that two FIRs arising from the same incident may be quashed if they are overlapping or redundant, especially when the allegations are identical or substantially similar. However, if the FIRs pertain to different circumstances or separate acts, they are likely to be maintained. For example, it is not desirable to quash the proceedings arising out of subsequent FIRs when incidents are distinct ["Chandrashekhar Alias Ravan vs State of U.P. - Allahabad"]. The principle that there cannot be two FIRs against the same accused in respect of the same case is acknowledged, but courts also emphasize assessing whether acts constitute the same transaction ["E Raju @ M Raju vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"], ["E Raju M Raju vs State of Telangana - Telangana"].
Cases involving same occurrence but different FIRs - When multiple FIRs are registered from the same incident, courts often examine whether they are based on the same facts or different acts. If the FIRs are similar and relate to the same incident, courts tend to quash the subsequent FIRs to avoid harassment, as seen in cases where FIRs pertain to one incident and are seeking quashing on the ground that misunderstanding...stands cleared ["John Vincent A. v. Government of Tamil Nadu Chennai and Others - Madras"], ["KULDEEP MAURYA Vs STATE & ANR. - Delhi"]. Conversely, if the FIRs involve different acts or circumstances, courts generally uphold them, noting the incidents are not identical ["Redaul Hussain Khan VS State of Assam - Gauhati"].
Applicability of SC/ST Act and specific offences - Courts have clarified that the applicability of the SC/ST Act must be carefully examined, and if the offence under this Act is not attracted, FIRs under it can be quashed. For instance, the provisions of SC/ST Act...are not attracted when the facts do not support it ["Ghanshyam Kumar VS State of Bihar - Patna"]. Similarly, cases under other specific sections like Section 354 IPC are scrutinized to determine if they are applicable, influencing whether FIRs can be quashed ["KULDEEP MAURYA Vs STATE & ANR. - Delhi"].
Legal principles and tests for quashing FIRs - Courts often refer to the sameness test to determine whether two FIRs relate to the same incident. They emphasize that there cannot be two FIRs registered for the same offence and that the legal position is that...two FIRs cannot be against the same accused for the same case ["Kingshuk Chatterjee VS State of West Bengal - Calcutta"], ["Farhana Khatoon, daughter of Nazir Ahmad VS State of Jharkhand through Vigilance, ACB - Jharkhand"]. The courts also recognize that it is not possible to enunciate any formula of universal application and that each case requires a fact-specific analysis ["E Raju M Raju vs State of Telangana - Telangana"].
Impact of ongoing trials and stage of proceedings - Courts generally avoid quashing FIRs when trial proceedings are already at advanced stages, such as evidence or midway, citing that it is not desirable to invoke the inherent power to quash at this stage ["SHIVAM GUPTA & ORS. Vs STATE & ORS. - Delhi"]. They prefer to allow the trial to proceed unless clear overlapping or abuse is evident.
Analysis and Conclusion:It is legally permissible to quash a case where two FIRs are registered from the same occurrence, especially if they are overlapping or redundant, and where the offences are identical. However, if the FIRs involve different acts, circumstances, or separate transactions, courts tend to uphold both. When the SC/ST Act or specific offences are not applicable, FIRs under those provisions can be quashed. Ultimately, the decision hinges on whether the FIRs relate to the same incident and whether continuing with multiple FIRs causes harassment or prejudice. This nuanced approach underscores the importance of case-specific facts and the principle that there is no universal formula for such determinations ["Euro International School VS State of Haryana - Punjab and Haryana"], ["REDAUL HUSSAIN KHAN vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS - Gauhati"], ["Chandrashekhar Alias Ravan vs State of U.P. - Allahabad"], ["E Raju @ M Raju vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"], ["E Raju M Raju vs State of Telangana - Telangana"].
In the complex landscape of Indian criminal law, situations often arise where multiple First Information Reports (FIRs) are registered for the same occurrence. Imagine this: two FIRs stem from one incident—one invoking the stringent Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act), and the other under general penal provisions without SC/ST charges. A common question emerges: Two cases existing from same occurrence and two FIRs registered accordingly. One FIR attracted SC/ST cases act, other not. Is it possible to quash the one case in which SC/ST Act attracted only?
This scenario raises critical issues of procedural fairness, abuse of process, and the courts' inherent powers. While this post provides general insights based on judicial precedents, it is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for case-specific guidance. Generally, yes, quashing the SC/ST FIR may be possible under certain conditions, as upheld by the Supreme Court and High Courts. Let's break it down.
Indian law frowns upon registering multiple FIRs for the same incident, viewing it as an abuse of process. The landmark Supreme Court judgment in T.T. Antony vs. State of KeralaBabubhai VS State of Gujarat - 2010 0 Supreme(SC) 782 established that a second FIR for the same incident and facts is liable to be quashed, unless the subsequent FIR involves different facts or constitutes a different incident. The Court stressed that investigation should proceed based on the first FIR, and duplicates amount to procedural misuse Babubhai VS State of Gujarat - 2010 0 Supreme(SC) 782.
Similarly, in R. N. R. vs. State of GujaratBabubhai VS State of Gujarat - 2010 0 Supreme(SC) 782, it was clarified that a second FIR, especially post-investigation commencement, is invalid and quashable. Other sources reinforce this: Multiple FIRs cannot be registered for the same incident arising from identical accusations against the same parties, highlighting abuse of process and procedural injustice. Mudavath Ramesh vs State of Telangana - 2025 Supreme(Telangana) 486
The SC/ST Act is a special statute aimed at preventing atrocities against Scheduled Castes and Tribes. However, its invocation isn't automatic. Offences require specific ingredients, such as the act being in public view with intent to humiliate an SC/ST member Gulam Mustafa VS State Of Karnataka - 2023 3 Supreme 751. If allegations fail these tests—or appear frivolous, vexatious, or motivated—courts intervene.
Under Section 482 of the CrPC (now Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), High Courts wield inherent powers to quash FIRs preventing abuse of process Gulam Mustafa VS State Of Karnataka - 2023 3 Supreme 751Pramod Suryabhan Pawar VS State of Maharashtra - 2019 0 Supreme(SC) 901. For SC/ST cases tied to the same incident as a non-SC/ST FIR:
The SC/ST Act, being a special statute, requires that allegations must meet specific criteria... if these are not met, proceedings can be quashed Gulam Mustafa VS State Of Karnataka - 2023 3 Supreme 751.
Courts exercise Section 482 CrPC judiciously but firmly. In Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand (cited in Vinod S/o. Shankar Thakare VS State of Maharashtra - 2022 Supreme(Bom) 1049), the Supreme Court noted SC/ST offences must be prima facie established; otherwise, remedies like anticipatory bail or quashing apply. Similarly, the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is wide and can be exercised to prevent abuse of process, especially when the FIR is based on facts not constituting an offence under the SC/ST Act Gulam Mustafa VS State Of Karnataka - 2023 3 Supreme 751.
From other rulings:- Multiple FIRs (e.g., Nos. 604/2015 and 605/2015) for one incident were addressed under Section 482, even for non-compoundable offences Kuldeep Maurya vs State.- If FIRs show remarkable identity... as if the first FIR is filed second time with no change in allegations then the Court may... quash the second FIR Bimal Dashrathbhai Parikh VS State Of Gujarat - 2024 Supreme(Guj) 1892.- SC/ST charges like Section 3(1)(xi) fail if accused lacked caste knowledge: offence under Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC and ST Act is not attracted. The First Information Report... clearly shows that the accused was not knowing the caste of the complainant Satish VS State of Maharashtra, Through Deputy Superintendent of Police, Police Station Pandharkawda, Yavatmal - 2019 Supreme(Bom) 255.
In a case involving Section 3(2)(v), charges stuck only if IPC offence (e.g., murder) was committed for the reason strictly of the latter belonging to SC/ST Sandeep Saju, S/O. Saju VS State Of Kerala Represented By Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam-682 032 - 2019 Supreme(Ker) 795.
Quashing isn't guaranteed:- If SC/ST allegations are prima facie valid (e.g., public humiliation intent proven), the FIR stands despite a parallel general FIR Babubhai VS State of Gujarat - 2010 0 Supreme(SC) 782.- Power exercised sparingly: Only for clear abuse, frivolity, or non-sustainability Babubhai VS State of Gujarat - 2010 0 Supreme(SC) 782.- Distinct transactions with different complainants/evidence can't be consolidated or quashed together Bimal Dashrathbhai Parikh VS State Of Gujarat - 2024 Supreme(Guj) 1892.
If the allegations in the FIR under the SC/ST Act are prima facie made out and meet the criteria of the law, then the FIR cannot be quashed solely because a similar FIR exists under general law Babubhai VS State of Gujarat - 2010 0 Supreme(SC) 782.
Facing dual FIRs? Consider:1. File a petition under Section 482 CrPC in the High Court, highlighting factual overlap and SC/ST deficiencies.2. Gather evidence showing mala fide intent or missing ingredients (e.g., no caste knowledge G. P. Muthu VS State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi - 2019 Supreme(Del) 2131, no public view).3. Reference precedents like T.T. AntonyBabubhai VS State of Gujarat - 2010 0 Supreme(SC) 782 and Akbaruddin Owaisi (via Mudavath Ramesh vs State of Telangana - 2025 Supreme(Telangana) 486).
Courts verify: Courts should carefully examine whether the second FIR is an abuse of process or motivated Gulam Mustafa VS State Of Karnataka - 2023 3 Supreme 751.
In conclusion, it is generally permissible to quash an SC/ST Act FIR based on the same incident as a non-SC/ST FIR, provided it's frivolous, lacks essential ingredients, or abuses process—without undermining the Act's objectives Babubhai VS State of Gujarat - 2010 0 Supreme(SC) 782Gulam Mustafa VS State Of Karnataka - 2023 3 Supreme 751. This upholds justice while curbing misuse.
Key Takeaways:- Multiple FIRs for identical incidents are impermissible Babubhai VS State of Gujarat - 2010 0 Supreme(SC) 782.- SC/ST quashing viable via Section 482 if allegations fail Gulam Mustafa VS State Of Karnataka - 2023 3 Supreme 751.- Always assess on facts; seek professional advice.
Stay informed, protect your rights responsibly.
References: Key cases include Babubhai VS State of Gujarat - 2010 0 Supreme(SC) 782, Gulam Mustafa VS State Of Karnataka - 2023 3 Supreme 751, Pramod Suryabhan Pawar VS State of Maharashtra - 2019 0 Supreme(SC) 901, Mudavath Ramesh vs State of Telangana - 2025 Supreme(Telangana) 486, Satish VS State of Maharashtra, Through Deputy Superintendent of Police, Police Station Pandharkawda, Yavatmal - 2019 Supreme(Bom) 255.
#QuashFIR #SCSTAct #CriminalLaw
One was that the Magistrate duly had the power to take suo moto action under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for getting an FIR registered and secondly that the bar of Section 22 of the MMDR Act would be attracted at the stage of taking of cognizance and not at the stage of registration of FIR or investigation ... In charge/SHO of the police station to lodge/register crime case/FIR even for the offences under the MMDR Act and the Rules made....
Following the distinguishing features of the two cases, I am of the view that the ratio of T.T. Antony (supra) is not attracted in the present matter. On the other hand, the ratio of Ram Lal Narang Vs. ... As regards the provisions of Section 219 under the Cr.P.C., which talks about a person being tried in one trial, if more than one offence of the same kind are committed within a period of 12 months, it would not be attracted in the present #HL_STAR....
Following the distinguishing features of the two cases, I am of the view that the ratio of T.T. Antony (supra) is not attracted in the present matter. On the other hand, the ratio of Ram Lal Narang v. ... As regards the provisions of Section 219 under the Cr.P.C., which talks about a person being tried in one trial, if more than one offence of the same kind are committed within a period of 12 months, it would not be attracted in the present #HL_START....
Despite this, incidents relating to the very same properties have attracted registration of independent FIRs As many as 243 cases have been registered. ... It is not possible to enunciate any formula of universal application for the purpose of determining whether two or more acts constitute the same transaction. ... The response of learned counsel for respondents is not one of denial of a particular individual being arrayed as accused in very many #H....
It is not possible to enunciate any formula of universal application to determine whether two or more acts constitute the same transaction. ... Bomraspet, passed by the II Additional Special Judge for Trial of SPE &ACB Cases –cum – Special Judge for Trial of Cases filed Under PDPP Act, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the trial Court’) and consequently quash the proceedings in the above said crimes. 3. ... attracted. ... Of course the legal position is that th....
Bomraspet, passed by the II Additional Special Judge for Trial of SPE &ACB Cases –cum – Special Judge for Trial of Cases filed Under PDPP Act, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the trial Court’) and consequently quash the proceedings in the above said crimes. ... It is not possible to enunciate any formula of universal application to determine whether two or more acts constitute the same transaction. ... attracted. ... Of course the legal position is that there....
The bail was granted by holding that the bar under Section 18 of the Act of 1989 was not attracted in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 10. ... Therefore, the registration of two FIRs and submission of two charge-sheets on selfsame incident is not acceptable in criminal jurisprudence. 28. ... The Court in order to examine the impact of one or more FIRs has to rationalize the facts and circumstances o....
In the above captioned first petition, quashing of FIR No.605/2015, whereas in the above captioned second petition, quashing of FIR No.604/2015, both under Sections 354A/323 of IPC, registered at police station Dabri, Delhi is sought. Both the FIRs pertain to one incident. ... The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non-compoundable. 16.3. ... Accordingly, subject to deposit of consolidated costs of Rs.10,000/- by petitioners in the ....
Both the FIRs pertain to one incident. Quashing of these FIRs is sought on the ground that misunderstanding which led to this incident, now stands cleared between the parties in terms of Mediated Settlement of 6th June, 2018 (Annexure P-3). ... with the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund within four weeks and after placing proof of deposit of costs on record of this case within two weeks thereafter, the proceedings arising out of FIR No.605/2015 and FIR No. 604/20....
between the two FIRs as if the first FIR is filed second time with no change in allegations then the Court may, in appropriate case, consider it proper to quash the second FIR. ... also disclose remarkable identity between the two FIRs as if the first FIR is filed second time with no change in allegations then the Court may, in appropriate case, consider it proper to quash the second FIR....
The informant himself agrees that the provisions of SC/ST Act would not be attracted.
i] Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another, (2020) 10 SCC 710 ii] Kiran s/o Madhukar Ingle Vs. In order to substantiate his submission, the learned Advocate relied upon the following reported decisions. In this case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the offence under the SC ST Act was prima facie made out. In the case of Manju Devi (cited supra) modesty of the informant was outraged. In the case of Bachu Das (cited supra) the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the bar under Section 18 of the SC ST Act would get attracted, if the offences under the SC ST Act are pr....
Therefore, as per provision of SC & ST Act, if any offence of IPC is committed against the member of SC & ST knowing well, he or she belongs to that category, provisions of SC & ST Act automatically get attracted. It is not in dispute that petitioners and respondent no.2 are neighbours and they know the caste of each other.
The offence attracted against the petitioners under the SC/ST (PA) Act in the case on hand is one punishable under Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST (PA) Act. In the context, it is relevant to extract Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST (PA) Act hereunder: The offences are described specifically under each of the provisions and the ingredients constituting each of the offences are also precisely dealt with.
Therefore, offence under Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC and ST Act is not attracted. The First Information Report in question clearly shows that the accused was not knowing the caste of the complainant. Learned Judge of the Court below has not considered submissions properly and rejected the application filed by the applicant.
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
