Supreme Court Quashes Second FIR Filed on Same Matrimonial Allegations

In Parteek Bansal v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (2024 Latest Caselaw 257 SC), the Supreme Court quashed a second FIR lodged on the same set of matrimonial allegations, holding that the complainants had misused the criminal justice system to harass the appellant. The Court observed that permitting parallel criminal proceedings on identical allegations would amount to an abuse of the process of law. 

The appellant married the complainant's daughter in March 2015. Subsequently, the complainant lodged a complaint at Hisar, Haryana, alleging offences under Section 498A IPC. A few days later, another complaint containing substantially the same allegations was lodged at Udaipur, Rajasthan, resulting in registration of a second FIR. Meanwhile, the police at Hisar completed the investigation, filed a chargesheet and the matter proceeded to trial. However, neither the complainant nor the victim appeared before the Trial Court, resulting in the appellant's acquittal. The appellant challenged the second FIR before the Rajasthan High Court under Section 482 CrPC, seeking its quashing. The High Court dismissed the petition, following which the appellant approached the Supreme Court. 

The principal issue was whether a second FIR based on the same allegations arising out of the same matrimonial dispute could be permitted to continue after an earlier FIR had already been investigated and tried.

The Supreme Court held that the continuation of the second FIR amounted to a clear abuse of the process of law. The Court observed that: •The complaint lodged at Hisar preceded the complaint filed at Udaipur. •The allegations in both complaints were substantially identical. •The complaint lodged at Udaipur itself disclosed that an earlier complaint had already been filed at Hisar. •The High Court erred in holding that the Udaipur complaint was prior in time and that the Rajasthan Police had no knowledge of the earlier proceedings. •The complainant and the victim deliberately chose not to participate in the trial at Hisar while simultaneously pursuing proceedings in Rajasthan. •The conduct of the complainant demonstrated an intention to subject the appellant to multiple criminal proceedings on the same allegations. The Supreme Court further noted that the complainant's daughter, being a gazetted police officer, was fully aware of the legal consequences of initiating multiple proceedings. The Court strongly deprecated the misuse of official position and the criminal justice system for causing harassment. 

The Supreme Court:

•Allowed the appeal. 

•Set aside the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court. 

•Quashed the second FIR registered at Women Police Station, Udaipur.

•Imposed costs of ₹5,00,000 on the complainant, directing that 50% be paid to the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee and the remaining 50% to the appellant. 

The judgment reinforces the settled principle that multiple FIRs based on the same cause of action and identical allegations cannot be used to harass an accused. It emphasises that the inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC must be exercised to prevent abuse of the judicial process where criminal proceedings are initiated with an ulterior motive. The decision also sends a strong message against the misuse of criminal law and official position to subject individuals to repeated prosecution arising from the same dispute.