The Supreme Court of India.
Credit: PTI Photo
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday said registration of second FIR is permissible when the scope and ambit of the two FIRs are distinct and different, though arising out of the same set of circumstances.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra set aside the Rajasthan High Court's September 9, 2022 order, which quashed an FIR, relating to corruption charges, upon a plea by Surendra Singh Rathore, employed as Chief Executive Officer-cum-Project Director, Bio-fuel Authority, Rajasthan government.
The first FIR was lodged on a demand made on April 4, 2022 for a bribe at the rate of Rs 2 per litre for the sale of bio-diesel, i.e., Rs 15 lakhs per month with a further Rs 5 lakhs for renewal of the license of the complainant.
The second FIR was lodged on April 24, 2022 alleging, amongst other persons, the respondent was indulging in taking bribes to grant licenses to run bio-fuel pumps.
The High Court held the second FIR was an abuse of the process of law and was not maintainable.
Going through the facts, the bench said, the scope of the two FIRs are distinct. The FIR prior in point of time referred to a particular incident and the action taken was limited. The second FIR, however, pertained to the larger issue of widespread corruption in the concerned department and, therefore, is much larger in its scope than the previous FIR, it noted.
The court felt quashing the FIR would nip the investigation into such corruption, in the bud, which would be against the interest of society.
In its judgment, the bench examined whether the registration of the subsequent FIR was permissible.
In T T Antony Vs State of Kerala (2001), it was held second FIR in a case which is not a cross-case, violated Article 21 of the Constitution and thus the second FIR was not maintainable.
"This rule, however, over the years through judicial pronouncements, has lent some flexibility," the bench said.
Following a series of judgments, the bench said, two FIRs can be lodged, i e, when the second FIR is counter-complaint or presents a rival version of a set of facts, in reference to which an earlier FIR already stands registered.
It can also be lodged, when the ambit of the two FIRs is different even though they may arise from the same set of circumstances; when investigation or other avenues reveal the earlier FIR or set of facts to be part of a larger conspiracy; when investigation and/or persons related to the incident bring to the light hitherto unknown facts or circumstances; and where the incident is separate; offences are similar or different, the bench said.