KAILASH CHAND MISHRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The aforementioned special appeal has been preferred by appellant Kailash Chand Mishra challenging the order dated 3-9-2007, passed by Single Bench, in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8464/2002, whereby the writ petition was dismissed. It may be mentioned here that as many as 25 writ petitions, presumably on a similar issues were heard and decided by the Single Bench by the impugned order. The case of the appellant is that he was being prosecuted in a large number of FIRs one after the other on the same issues and with the same, allegations. In the writ petition, the petitioner has impugned FIRs No. 661/1995, 310/1999, 191/1999, and criminal complaint, Anexure-4, 7, 8, and 10 respectively. As per the learned counsel for the appellant these criminal cases are virtually nothing but repetition of each other, and as per the counsel for appellant, subsequent FIRs on the same allegations cannot be registered against an accused, in absence of extraordinary circumstances. Learned counsel has placed reliance on T.T. Antony vs. State of Kerala & Ors., 2001 5 JT 440 to give substance to his contentions.

(2.) We have carefully considered the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant and carefully perused the material available on record.

(3.) At the outset it may be noted that the assertion of the counsel for the appellant that he is being prosecuted for the same allegations in several cases one after the other, is patently absurd and unfounded. The FIR No. 661/1995 (Annexure-4) was registered way back in the year 1995 for the offences under section 420 IPC, and Section 203 of Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959. The FIR No. 310/1999 (Annexure-7) was registered for the offence under section 447 IPC. Admittedly, as per the counsel for the appellant, the result of investigation of FIR has been filed in the said F.I.Rs. The annexure-8, is not a FIR, as claimed by the appellant, instead is the result of investigation of FIR No. 310/1999. The annexure-10 is a complaint filed against the appellant in the year 2002 for the offence under Sections 447, 120B, 420, 467, 471, and 472 IPC. Even, it has been admitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the two F.I.Rs. being F.I.R. No. 661/95 and F.I.R. No. 310/99 have already been investigated and reports under Sec. 173 Cr.P.C. have been filed in these F.I.Rs. The appellant has already challenged the impugned F.I.Rs./ complaint by way of different petitions before this court as well as before the lower courts.