Second FIR against Officers for an offence or different offences committed in course of same transaction was quashed

Vikas Chaudhary Vs CBI (Delhi High Court)

Conclusion: The Delhi High Court Ruled That The Second FIR In Respect Of An Offence Or Different Offences Committed In The Course Of The Same Transaction Is Not Only Impermissible But It Violates Article 21 Of The Constitution.

Held: Assessee seeking registration of an FIR on the basis of complaints dated September, 2019, 01.02.2020 and 06.07.2020 made by assessee to CBI against the Public servant and other officers and associates for allegedly demanding a sum of Rs.10 crores and extorting Rs.1.50 crore from assessee, inter alia under section 7, 8, 9 of the Prevention of Corruption Act,  1988 read with sections 383/384/385/386/389/34/120B of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Applicant, Anoop Joshis made the prayer seeking an Interim Order to the CBI not to register an FIR against him on the allegations in the Writ Petition till the disposal and also Mr.Chander Shekhar, Former Public Servant sought intervention and sought that he too be arrayed as a party to the petition. It has been submitted on behalf of the CBI that the statements that have been recorded during the course of investigation in RC-DAI-2019-A-0042 under Section 7A of PC Act and Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860, would not in any manner lead to any fruitful investigation on the complaint that had been made by assessee vide his complaint dated 06.07.2020. It was held that a case of fresh investigation based on the second or successive FIRs, not being a counter-case, filed in connection with the same or connected cognizable offence alleged to have been committed in the course of the same transaction and in respect of which pursuant to the first FIR either investigation is under way or final report under Section 173(2) has been forwarded to the Magistrate, may be a fit case for exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC or under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution. Taking the said aspect into account, the intervention application and the application filed by the applicants seeking a stay of the proceedings in relation to W.P.(Crl.)1734/2020 as well as any directions for non-registration of the FIR as prayed on behalf of the applicant of CRL.M.A.5110/2021 cannot be granted and is declined and the other applications i.e. CRL.M.A. 5160/2021 seeking directions & CRL.M.A. 4737/2021 seeking that the applicant be allowed to intervene in W.P.(CRL) 1734/2020 and be allowed to be arrayed as a respondent thereto and be allowed to file a detailed counter affidavit to the said writ petition are thus declined.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER of DELHI HIGH COURT

The applicant of CRL.M.A. 4737/2021 is also the applicant of CRL.M.A. 5160/2021. The proceedings in the matter qua W.P.(CRL) 1734/2020 filed by the petitioner are listed for the date 09.04.2021 vide which the petitioner has made the following prayers:-

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.