It is well settled principle of law that there can be no second FIR in the event of any further information being received by the investigating agency in respect of offence or the same occurrence or incident giving rise to one or more offences for which chargesheet has already been filed by the investigating agency. The recourse available with the investigating agency in the said situation is to conduct further investigation normally with the leave of the court as provided Under Sub-section (8) to Section 173 of Code of Criminal Procedure The reliance is placed on the decision of this Court rendered in T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala MANU/SC/0365/2001 : (2001) 6 SCC 181, relevant paras of which read thus:
19. The scheme of Code of Criminal Procedure is that an officer in charge of a police station has to commence investigation as provided in Section 156 or 157 Code of Criminal Procedure on the basis of entry of the first information report, on coming to know of the commission of a cognizable offence. On completion of investigation and on the basis of the evidence collected, he has to form an opinion Under Section 169 or 170 Code of Criminal Procedure, as the case may be, and forward his report to the Magistrate concerned Under Section 173(2) Code of Criminal Procedure.However, even after filing such a report, if he comes into possession of further information or material, he need not register a fresh FIR; he is empowered to make further investigation, normally with the leave of the court, and where during further investigation he collects further evidence, oral or documentary, he is obliged to forward the same with one or more further reports; this is the import of Sub-section (8) of Section 173 Code of Criminal Procedure.
xx xx xx
21....The 1973 Code of Criminal Procedure specifically provides for further investigation after forwarding of report Under Sub-section (2) of Section 173 Code of Criminal Procedure and forwarding of further report or reports to the Magistrate concerned Under Section 173(8) Code of Criminal Procedure. It follows that if the gravamen of the charges in the two FIRs - the first and the second - is in truth and substance the same, registering the second FIR and making fresh investigation and forwarding report Under Section 173 Code of Criminal Procedure will be irregular and the court cannot take cognizance of the same.
(Emphasis supplied)
26. However, this principle of law is not applicable to the fact situation in the instant case as the substance of the allegations in the said two FIRs is different. The first FIR deals with offences punishable Under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Act, whereas, the second FIR deals with the offences punishable Under Sections 419 and 420 of Indian Penal Code which are alleged to have committed during the course of investigation of the case in the first FIR. This Court is of the view that the alleged offences under the second FIR in substance are distinct from the offences under the first FIR and they cannot, in any case, said to be in the form of the part of same transaction with the alleged offences under the first FIR. Therefore, no question of further investigation could be made by the investigating agency on the alleged offences arisen as the term "further investigation" occurred Under Sub-section (8) to Section 173 of Code of Criminal Procedure connotes the investigation of the case in continuation of the earlier investigation with respect to which the chargesheet has already been filed.
Equivalent Citation: 2016(1)SCALE200,AIR 2016 SC373
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 2016 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 975 of 2015)
Decided On: 07.01.2016
Appellants: Awadesh Kumar Jha and Ors.
Vs.
Respondent: The State of Bihar
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:T.S. Thakur, C.J.I. and V. Gopala Gowda, J.
