FIR on Same Facts After Complaint Dismissed Under Section 203 CrPC Not Permissible: Rajasthan High Court

The complainant alleged that the petitioner used forged documents when filing his nomination for, and in his election as, Sarpanch in January 2015 (para 6). His first complaint, which also asked for forwarding to the police under Section 156(3) CrPC, was dismissed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deeg on 26.05.2015; another person's complaint on identical facts was dismissed on 19.10.2015 (para 6). The same complainant then filed a fresh complaint, which was forwarded under Section 156(3), and FIR No. 647/2015 was registered on 27.10.2015 under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC (paras 2, 7). The State reported a prima facie case, and the complainant cited an election-petition finding of forged documents (paras 3-4).

The Court found it admitted that the complainant's first complaint, which also sought forwarding under Section 156(3) CrPC, had been dismissed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, and that a second complaint by another person on identical facts had also been dismissed (para 6). The same complainant then filed a fresh complaint, it was forwarded under Section 156(3), and the FIR was registered; the FIR itself recorded that his earlier complaint had been dismissed (para 7). In T.T. Antony, Babubhai and Amitbhai Anilchandra Shah, the Supreme Court held that a subsequent FIR on the same set of facts and allegations relating to the same transaction is not maintainable, and the question was again considered in State of Rajasthan v. Surendra Singh Rathore after Nirmal Singh Kahlon (para 8). Because the earlier dismissal was an order under Section 203 CrPC, registration of a second FIR by the same complainant on the same facts was not permissible, and the FIR with its consequential proceedings had to be quashed (paras 9-10).