Court condemns abuse of judicial process through multiple FIRs for the same incident in different jurisdictions.
In a landmark judgment, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has quashed an FIR registered against Vishvendra Singh, a whistleblower in a massive real estate fraud case, marking a significant stand against the misuse of judicial processes. The court, presided over by Justice M. A. Chowdhary, found that the FIR registered at Budgam was an abuse of the judicial process, as it was based on the same set of facts already being contested in another complaint at Srinagar.
The petitioner, Vishvendra Singh, had been embroiled in a legal battle with the notorious builder Ashish Bhalla of the WTC group, who allegedly siphoned crores of rupees from AN Buildwell Pvt Ltd. Singh, a resident of Delhi, had exposed this scam and consequently faced multiple FIRs filed by Bhalla's company across different jurisdictions, including Srinagar, Budgam, and New Delhi, all based on the same alleged social media activity.
Justice Chowdhary emphasized that filing multiple FIRs or complaints on the same set of facts is impermissible under Indian law and constitutes an abuse of the judicial process. The judgment highlighted that such actions violate the "Test of Sameness" principle and fundamental safeguards under Article 20(2) and Article 21 of the Constitution, which protect against double jeopardy and ensure the right to life and personal liberty.
The court noted the respondent's deliberate concealment of prior proceedings and attempts to secure conflicting judicial orders by approaching different courts without disclosing existing cases. This, the judgment stated, amounted to "forum shopping" and was a gross misuse of the legal system designed to harass and exhaust the petitioner’s resources.
The judgment drew on precedents set by the Supreme Court, particularly in the cases of "T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala" and "Amitbhai Anilchandra Shah v. CBI," which reiterated that multiple FIRs for the same occurrence are not permissible and would lead to judicial anarchy.
In a strong rebuke to the misuse of judicial machinery, the High Court quashed the FIR registered at Budgam, underscoring that the criminal justice system should not be weaponized for corporate vendetta or personal harassment. The court's decision is seen as a reaffirmation of legal principles protecting individuals from being subjected to multiple prosecutions for the same act, ensuring that justice is not only done but seen to be done.
Bottom line:-
Filing multiple FIRs or complaints based on the same set of facts across different jurisdictions is impermissible under law and constitutes an abuse of the judicial process.
Statutory provision(s): Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 156(3), Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 469, 505(2), 499, 500, Constitution of India, 1950 Articles 20(2), 21, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 210
