No Room for Second FIR in Same Allegations: Calcutta High Court Rules in Rashmi Metaliks Case

High Court Quashes Second FIR, Upholds Principle of Single FIR - The Calcutta High Court has quashed a second FIR against M/s. Rashmi Metaliks Ltd., affirming the principle that a second FIR based on the same set of allegations is not maintainable. The judgment delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Subhendu Samanta emphasized the impermissibility of filing multiple FIRs for the same offence, referencing key precedents set by the Supreme Court.

M/s. Rashmi Metaliks Ltd. Faced allegations of evading freight charges payable to South Eastern Railway by showing false declarations for iron ore usage. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) initially filed an FIR (RC No. 0102012A/002) on January 10, 2012, covering the period from 2006 to 2011. Subsequently, a second FIR (RC No. 010/2014A/0015) was filed on June 14, 2014, for the financial year 2011-2012. The petitioner, M/s. Rashmi Metaliks Ltd., argued that both FIRs were based on the same set of allegations and thus the second FIR should be quashed.

Justice Subhendu Samanta highlighted the principle laid down in TT Anthony vs. State of Kerala and Amit Bhai Anilchandra Shah vs. CBI, which prohibits the filing of a second FIR for the same set of allegations. The court noted, “The scheme of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) allows only the first information in regard to the commission of a cognizable offence to satisfy the requirements of Section 154 CrPC. There can be no second FIR for the same occurrence or incident giving rise to one or more cognizable offences.”

The court emphasized that the CBI admitted to using documents seized during the investigation of the first FIR in the charge sheet of the second FIR. This indicated that the investigations were inherently linked and should be consolidated under the original FIR. “The conduct of CBI itself proved that the merits of both the FIRs are same and similar,” the judgment noted.

The judgment clarified that further investigation can be conducted under the original FIR without the need to file a new FIR for each subsequent piece of information. “The investigating agency is empowered to make further investigation and collect further evidence without registering a fresh FIR, as provided under sub-section (8) of Section 173 CrPC,” the court observed.

Justice Subhendu Samanta remarked, “According to the observation of the Hon’ble Apex Court in TT Anthony and Amit Shah, the subsequent FIR being RC No. 15 of 2014 is a second FIR of the same allegation against the present petitioners made in RC-02/2012 dated 10.01.2012 and it is not at all maintainable.”

The Calcutta High Court’s decision to quash the second FIR reinforces the judiciary’s commitment to preventing abuse of the investigative process through the filing of multiple FIRs for the same allegations. By upholding the principle of a single FIR, the judgment protects the fundamental rights of the accused against repetitive and redundant legal actions. This ruling is expected to significantly impact future cases, ensuring adherence to procedural requirements and the proper conduct of investigations.

Date of Decision: 27 June 2024

M/s. Rashmi Metaliks Ltd. Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation