Court Rules Second FIR Permissible if it Presents a Different Narrative from the First
In a significant decision, the Allahabad High Court, presided over by Justice Rajeev Singh, ruled that the filing of a second First Information Report (FIR) is permissible when it introduces a different version of events, even if it involves the complainant of the first FIR as an accused in the second. The court dismissed the application filed by Sarfaraz Ansari @ Munni, challenging the proceedings initiated from a second FIR in a 2001 case, citing the distinct narrative it presented.
The case revolves around a violent incident in 2001 in Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh, involving rival groups led by Mukhtar Ansari and Brijesh Singh. The first FIR, lodged by Mukhtar Ansari, accused Brijesh Singh and others of the attack. Years later, in 2023, a second FIR was filed by the father of one of the deceased alleged assailants from the first incident, presenting a contrasting account and naming Mukhtar Ansari and his associates as the perpetrators.
The applicant, Sarfaraz Ansari, sought the quashing of the charge sheet and proceedings arising from the second FIR, arguing that it pertained to the same incident from 2001. The counsel for the applicant cited previous Supreme Court judgments, asserting that a second FIR on the same facts is impermissible. However, the court maintained that the second FIR was based on a different narrative, thus allowing its continuation.
Justice Singh emphasized that the trial had already commenced with witnesses being examined, and the charges were framed. As such, the court found no grounds to interfere, reinforcing that a different version of events justifies a separate FIR. The ruling aligns with the principles laid out in judgments like T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala and others, which outline circumstances under which multiple FIRs are permissible.
This decision underlines the judiciary's stance on allowing the legal process to explore all facets of complex cases, ensuring that justice is served through a comprehensive examination of differing narratives.
Bottom Line:
Filing of a second FIR is permissible when the version of the case is different from the first FIR, and the complainant of the first FIR is accused in the second FIR. Interference by the Court is not warranted during the trial if the second FIR presents a distinct narrative.
Statutory provision(s): Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 482, 161, 164, 173; Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 34
Sarfaraz Ansari @ Munni v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc id # 2885819
