No multiple FIRs for the same incident : Investigative lapses can be addressed through further investigation or filing a Protest Petition.

Delhi High Court Quashes Subsequent FIR in CAA Riot Case Court Upholds Single FIR Rule, Cautions Against Extensive Use of Case Diaries in Judicial Orders

In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court quashed a subsequent FIR related to the 2020 anti-CAA riots, emphasizing that multiple FIRs for the same incident are impermissible. The decision, delivered by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, addressed two petitions concerning an order directing the registration of a separate FIR against Naresh Tyagi and others, which stemmed from allegations made by complainant Mohd. Nasir.

The court underscored that the incident in question, wherein Nasir suffered a gunshot injury during the riots, had already been investigated under FIR No. 64/2020. Justice Krishna noted, "The complaint of Mohd. Nasir narrates an incident which is not independent of the one already recorded in FIR No. 64/2020. Therefore, no separate FIR could have been directed to be registered."

Highlighting investigative lapses in the original FIR, the judgment suggested that grievances regarding inadequate investigations could be addressed through further investigations or by filing a Protest Petition, rather than registering a new FIR.

The court also addressed concerns regarding the use of Case Diaries in judicial orders, cautioning against their extensive reference, especially when investigations are ongoing. The judgment expunged all references made to the Case Diaries in the lower court's order, aligning with statutory provisions under Sections 162 and 172 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

Additionally, the court set aside a cost of Rs. 25,000 imposed on the investigating officer, citing a lack of evidence for intentional investigation gaps. The ruling emphasized the importance of diligent but fair investigation processes without prejudging cases before trial.

The decision reaffirms the legal principle that multiple FIRs for the same incident are not permissible, providing a clear directive for future handling of such cases. The petitions, CRL.M.C. 1568/2021 and CRL.M.C. 1653/2021, were disposed of with these observations, merging the complaint into the existing FIR No. 64/2020.

Bottom Line:

Registration of multiple FIRs for the same incident is impermissible under Section 210 Cr.P.C. A complaint that narrates the same incident already covered in an existing FIR cannot result in a separate FIR. Investigative lapses in an FIR can be addressed through further investigation, summoning under Section 319 Cr.P.C., or filing a Protest Petition.

Statutory provisions: Sections 210, 482, 162, 172, 319, 156(3), 200, 401, 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973

Naresh Tyagi v. State (NCT of Delhi), (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2817174