( 2025:JHHC:29789 ) 1 Cr. M.P. No.4501 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.4501 of 2022 ------ Lallu Mian @ Sajid Hussain, aged about 65 years, son of Md. Naimuddin, Resident of village-Jalwabad, P.O.-Jalwabad, P.S.- Koderma, District-Koderma. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sahil, Advocate : Mr. Shubham Srivastava, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, Addl.P.P. ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash and set aside the FIR and entire criminal proceeding of Koderma P.S. Case No.87 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 337, 153A of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner for being the second FIR in respect of self-same occurrence for which Koderma P.S. Case No.85 of 2022 was registered. 3. The brief fact of the case is that Koderma P.S. Case No.85 of 2022 has been registered on the basis of written report submitted by the District Statistical Officer, Koderma who was deputed by the order of Deputy Commissioner, Koderma, on the occasion of festival of Ramnawami and ( 2025:JHHC:29789 ) 2 Cr. M.P. No.4501 of 2022 Chaiti Durga (Vijay Dashmi) in the year 2022. It is alleged that on 10.04.2022, when the Ramnawami procession was passing by the Mosque, the petitioner and the co-accused persons being members of an unlawful assembly being armed with weapons, use criminal force against the public servant police personnel and other public servant, deterring them to discharging their duties by resorting to brick batting, caused hurt to members of the police party deputed to ensure smooth passing of the Ramnawami procession, wrongfully restrained them, used criminal force against public servant deterring them from discharging their duties, caused hurt to the persons in the procession as well as the police personnel and the informant, by doing acts so rashly and negligently as to endanger their life and personal safety and intentionally insulted them provoking them to cause breach of peace and other offences. Three of the accused persons of the case caused ruckus by climbing over the vehicle of the procession and promoted enmity between the different groups on the ground of the religion. Because of the said acts of the accused persons of the case including the petitioner, the members of Ramnawami procession were injured. The petitioner and the co-accused persons also manhandled the public servant who were deputed for smooth passage of the procession. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the investigation of Koderma P.S. Case No.85 of 2022 is still going on. It is next submitted that the FIR in connection with Koderma P.S. Case No.87 of 2022 has been registered on the basis of written report submitted by the villagers in ( 2025:JHHC:29789 ) 3 Cr. M.P. No.4501 of 2022 respect of self-same allegations by alleging that the Ramnawami procession under the supervision of the Administration was going on from Nagarkhara Bajrangbali Temple and when it reached near the Mosque suddenly, the petitioner and 200 other being members of an unlawful assembly resorted to brick batting over the procession. On the basis of the same Koderma P.S. Case No.87 of 2022 was registered and police took up investigation of the case and investigation is going on. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner next relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of T.T. Antony vs. State of Kerela & Ors. reported in (2001) 6 SCC 181, paragraph nos. 25 and 27 of which reads as under:- “25. Where the police transgresses its statutory power of investigation the High Court under Section 482 CrPC or Articles 226/227 of the Constitution and this Court in an appropriate case can interdict the investigation to prevent abuse of the process of the court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. 27. A just balance between the fundamental rights of the citizens under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution and the expansive power of the police to investigate a cognizable offence has to be struck by the court. There cannot be any controversy that subsection (8) of Section 173 CrPC empowers the police to make further investigation, obtain further evidence (both oral and documentary) and forward a further report or reports to the Magistrate. In Narang case [(1979) 2 SCC 322 : 1979 SCC (Cri) 479] it was, however, observed that it would be appropriate to conduct further investigation with the permission of the court. However, the sweeping power of investigation does not warrant subjecting a citizen each time to fresh investigation by the police in respect of the same incident, giving rise to one or more cognizable offences, consequent upon filing of successive FIRs whether before or after filing the final report under Section 173(2) CrPC. It would clearly be beyond the purview of Sections 154 and 156 CrPC, nay, a case of abuse of the statutory power of investigation in a given case. In our view 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 ( 2025:JHHC:29789 ) 4 Cr. M.P. No.4501 of 2022 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.” (Emphasis supplied) submits that there in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that 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) of Cr.P.C. has been forwarded to the Magistrate, may be a fit case for exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC. It is lastly submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Cr.M.P., be allowed. 6. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner in the second FIR. Therefore, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed. 7. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Tarak Das Mukherjee & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. in Criminal Appeal ( 2025:JHHC:29789 ) 5 Cr. M.P. No.4501 of 2022 No. 1400 of 2022 dated 23.08.2022, paragraph no.12 of which reads and under:- 12. If multiple First Information Reports by the same person against the same accused are permitted to be registered in respect of the same set of facts and allegations, it will result in the accused getting entangled in multiple criminal proceedings for the same alleged offence. Therefore, the registration of such multiple FIRs is nothing but abuse of the process of law. Moreover, the act of the registration of such successive FIRs on the same set of facts and allegations at the instance of the same informant will not stand the scrutiny of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. The settled legal position on this behalf has been completely ignored by the High Court.” (Emphasis supplied) that if multiple First Information Reports by the same person against the same accused are permitted to be registered in respect of the same set of facts and allegations, it will result in the accused getting entangled in multiple criminal proceedings for the same alleged offence. Therefore, the registration of such multiple FIRs is nothing but abuse of the process of law. 8. After going through the contents of both the FIR’s, this Court has no hesitation in holding that both FIRs relate to the same occurrence of brick batting and manhandling the members of the Ramnawami procession, which was going on inter alia under the supervision and presence of public servant police personnel and the informant of Koderma P.S. Case No.85 of 2022. 9. Thus, in view of the settled principle of law, registration of Koderma P.S. Case No.87 of 2022 being the Second FIR in respect of self- same occurrence, is hit by section 162 of the Cr.P.C.. Hence, this Court is ( 2025:JHHC:29789 ) 6 Cr. M.P. No.4501 of 2022 of the considered view that the continuation of this criminal proceeding against the petitioner will amount to abuse of process of law and this is a fit case where the FIR and entire criminal proceeding of Koderma P.S. Case No.87 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 337, 153(A) of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner, be quashed and set aside. 10. Accordingly, the FIR and entire criminal proceeding of Koderma P.S. Case No.87 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 337, 153(A) of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner, is quashed and set aside qua the petitioner only. 11. In the result, this Cr.M.P., stands allowed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 24th of September, 2025 AFR/ Abhiraj