Second FIR Not Barred If Allegations Are Substantially Different: Kerala HC
Principle: Second FIR Not Barred If Allegations Are Substantially Different
The general rule in criminal law is that the police can register an FIR (First Information Report) whenever they receive credible information about a cognizable offence. However, questions often arise about whether a second FIR can be registered for the same incident or whether multiple FIRs related to the same facts can be barred.
The settled legal position is that a second FIR is not barred if the allegations or offences in the second FIR are substantially different or distinct from those in the first FIR.
This principle protects the right of victims or complainants to seek redress for different or newly discovered offences and ensures that police action is not unduly restricted by technicalities.
Kerala High Court's Explanation
In its various judgments, the Kerala High Court has observed that:
The mere fact that an FIR is already registered does not bar registration of a second FIR if it relates to different offences or distinct facts.
The FIR is a tool to record information about the commission of an offence; it is not a substitute for a police or judicial inquiry.
Different sets of facts leading to different offences can warrant separate FIRs.
The police should not refuse registration of an FIR simply because another FIR is pending, if the second FIR discloses new facts or a different offence.
The Kerala High Court has repeatedly emphasized that the purpose of the FIR is to set the machinery of the criminal justice system in motion and should not be denied on technical grounds.
Case Laws Supporting the Principle
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, (1992) Supp (1) SCC 335
The Supreme Court laid down guidelines on when FIRs should not be registered. However, it made clear that where allegations are different or involve different offences, multiple FIRs can be registered.
Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of UP, (2014) 2 SCC 1
The Supreme Court reiterated that the police must register an FIR on receipt of information disclosing a cognizable offence and that refusal to do so can be challenged.
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273
The Court recognized the importance of FIR registration and the rights of the complainant to have their grievances registered if they disclose a cognizable offence.
Hare Ram Sharma v. State of Haryana, AIR 1958 SC 121
It was held that multiple FIRs can be registered if they relate to different facts or offences and that the mere pendency of one FIR does not bar the registration of another.
Nihal Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1959 SC 1005
The Supreme Court held that the police should investigate the matter properly and not refuse registration on technical grounds.
Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagat Ram, AIR 1960 SC 430
The Court held that different sets of facts constituting different offences warrant separate FIRs.
Summary
Multiple FIRs can be registered if the allegations are substantially different, relate to different offences, or involve different sets of facts.
The police have a duty to register FIRs whenever they receive information about a cognizable offence.
The registration of FIR is not the final determination of guilt or innocence but a starting point for investigation.
The Kerala High Court, following Supreme Court precedents, has consistently upheld that second or subsequent FIRs are valid when they disclose new offences or distinct facts.
This ensures that victims' rights to seek justice are protected and the criminal justice system functions fairly and effectively.
