Repeated FIRs Against Multiple Accused Raise Serious Questions on Motive: Allahabad High Court Orders CBI Inquiry

Criminal Law Cannot Be Used as a Tool for Harassment – In a significant order dated March 5, 2025, the Allahabad High Court directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate a pattern of repeated FIRs filed by an informant against multiple individuals. The Court, while hearing Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 1793 of 2025 – Arvind Yadav & Another v. State of U.P., noted that the informant, Pooja Rawat, had lodged at least 12 FIRs against various individuals, raising serious concerns about the credibility of her claims.

A division bench comprising Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Brij Raj Singh observed, "The lodging of a large number of criminal complaints of a similar nature by the informant through the same counsel against multiple individuals suggests a pattern that requires deeper scrutiny."

Considering the gravity of the matter, the Court stayed the arrest of the accused and directed the CBI to submit a report by April 10, 2025.

The case arose when Arvind Yadav and another petitioner approached the High Court, seeking quashing of FIR No. 40 of 2025, lodged at Police Station Vibhuti Khand, Lucknow, under Sections 64, 74, 115(2), 316(2), 324(4), 333, 351(3), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and Section 66D of the IT Act, 2008.

The petitioners alleged that the complainant, Pooja Rawat, had a history of filing numerous criminal cases against different individuals. According to the petitioners' counsel, she had lodged at least 11 other FIRs against various people, all filed through the same lawyer, Parmanand Gupta.

"The details of these previous FIRs are striking. It appears that the complainant and her counsel are engaged in a pattern of filing multiple serious criminal allegations, which raises the question of whether these are genuine or being used for an ulterior motive," the Court remarked.

The High Court was presented with a list of prior FIRs and complaints filed by Pooja Rawat, all naming different individuals in various cases. The petitioners contended that this pattern suggested a deliberate attempt to misuse criminal law rather than a genuine grievance.

Allegations of False Cases and Legal Extortion – "CBI Must Scrutinize the Motive"

The petitioners argued that the informant had lodged complaints in a calculated manner to pressurize the accused into financial settlements. They further claimed that her lawyer, Parmanand Gupta, had a similar record of filing multiple criminal cases against different people.

"It is also apparent that the informant and her counsel are in collusion with each other and have lodged false FIRs against a large number of people for serious offences only to extract money from them," the petitioners' counsel submitted.

The State's counsel (AGA) confirmed that multiple cases had indeed been filed by the same informant and lawyer against different individuals. The High Court found this fact alarming and deemed it fit for an independent investigation by the CBI.

"When an individual repeatedly files serious criminal complaints against different people, it raises a fundamental question of whether justice is being sought or the law is being manipulated for personal gain," the Court observed.

Allahabad High Court Orders CBI Inquiry – "Seriousness of Allegations Requires Independent Investigation"

Taking cognizance of the repetitive nature of the complaints, the Court deemed it appropriate to direct the CBI to examine the authenticity of these cases.

"Considering the seriousness of the allegations regarding multiple criminal complaints being filed by the same informant and her counsel against various individuals, we direct the CBI to conduct an inquiry and submit a report to this Court," the bench ruled.

The CBI was instructed to file its report by April 10, 2025, with the High Court listing the matter for further hearing on that date.

Additionally, the Court provided interim relief to the petitioners, stating that they shall not be arrested unless sufficient and credible evidence is found against them.

"Until further orders, the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case unless and until there is sufficient and credible evidence available against them indicating the commission of the offence as alleged in the FIR," the order stated.

Significance of the Judgment – Preventing the Misuse of Criminal Law

This ruling sets an important precedent by emphasizing that criminal law cannot be used as a tool for harassment or financial extortion. The Court’s order serves as a warning against the misuse of legal provisions for personal vendettas, particularly when complaints appear to follow a pattern of repeated litigation against multiple individuals.

The CBI inquiry is expected to shed light on whether these FIRs were genuine complaints or part of a larger strategy to coerce settlements from the accused.

The High Court's strong remarks and intervention highlight the judiciary's commitment to preventing the abuse of criminal law. By staying the arrest of the accused, the Court has ensured that innocent individuals are not subjected to unwarranted prosecution based on dubious allegations.

The matter now awaits the CBI's findings, which will determine the course of future proceedings.

Date of Decision: March 5, 2025