-
by sayum
10 June 2026 2:36 PM
In a significant judgment delivered on December 1, 2023, the High Court of Kerala, presided over by Honorable Mr. Justice P.G. Ajithkumar, upheld the dismissal of discharge applications in the linked criminal revision petitions numbered 355 and 379 of 2019. The petitions challenged an earlier order concerning alleged offenses related to property fraud and forgery, involving the impersonation of U. Raghavan in property sales.
The court’s decision hinged on the principle that “there cannot be two FIRs for the same incident,” a legal point scrutinized extensively during the proceedings. However, Justice Ajithkumar observed substantial differences in the FIRs in question, stating, “Both FIRs pertain to different aspects of the alleged offense, leading to the dismissal of the revision petitions.”
The case centered around the allegations against Mohammed Kunhi, the fourth accused, who was alleged to have executed a fraudulent sale deed in favor of respondent V. Hashim, after acquiring property through forged documents. The court meticulously examined whether the FIRs were based on the same set of facts and found significant distinctions.
Justice Ajithkumar highlighted, “Allegations in the two F.I.Rs. have substantial difference. The complainants are different. All the accused are not common.” This observation was crucial in determining that the cases did not attract the prohibition of a second FIR for the same incident, a point that was contested by the petitioners.
The judgment also referenced several precedent cases, including the principles laid down in landmark decisions such as ‘T.T Antony v. State of Kerala and others [(2001) 6 SCC 181]’ and ‘Upkar Singh v. Ved Prakash and others [(2004) 13 SCC 292]’. These cases provided a legal framework for understanding the intricacies of FIR registrations and their implications in criminal law.
Date of Decision: 1st December 2023
Mohammed Kunhi VS State of Kerala and V. Hashim
