Nidumolu Venkata Satya Lakshmi Kiran Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

NIDUMOLU VENKATA SATYA LAKSHMI KIRAN, S/O SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RIO PLOT NO.1, ROAD NO.9, SECTOR-1, LOTUS LANDMARK, AYODHYA NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522238.

¶13

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT - 523002.

¶14

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, NTR COMMISSIONERATE, VIJAYAWADA - 520002.

¶15

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, S.N. PURAM POLICE STATION, VIJAYAWADA - 520003.

¶16

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ONGOLE TALUK POLICE STATION, PRAKASAM DISTRICT - 523001.

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

2

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶20

1.SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶22

1.GP FOR HOME

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶24

The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief:

¶25

“…to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents in registering and proceeding with FIR No.115/2025 dated 14.04.2025 of S.N. Puram Police Station, Vijayawada, and FIR No.292/2025 dated 19.05.2025 of Ongole Town Police Station, Prakasam District, in respect of the very same transaction and cause of action, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, being contrary to the law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala and Arnab Ranjan Goswami v. Union of India and Consequently direct the respondents to drop, close, or not to proceed further with the investigation or any proceedings pursuant to FIR No.115/2025 and FIR No.292/2025, including the filing of any charge sheet Further, direct the respondents to confine the investigation, if any, only to FIR No.114/2025 dated 14.04.2025 registered at S.N. Puram Police Station, Vijayawada, be pleased to direct that all cases arising out of the same transaction be clubbed together and tried by a single competentcourt through a common investigation and common trial, so as to prevent multiplicity of proceedings, conflicting findings, and abuse of the process of law…”

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant

¶27

Government Pleader.

¶28

Mr. Siva Prasad Reddy Venati, learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that altogether three FIRs were registered by different victims/de-facto complainants against the Petitioner, i.e., Cr.Nos.114 and 115 of 2025 of Satyanarayanapuram Police Station, Vijayawada, and Cr.No.292 of 2025 on the file of Ongole Taluk Police Station.

¶29

3

¶30

Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that the FIRs were registered on the basis of independent complaints by different victims, each constituting distinct offences of cheating and misappropriation. He further submits that the principle against multiple FIRs does not apply here, and the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed in the interest of justice and protection of victims.

¶31

On perusal of the record, although the de-facto complainants are different in the three crimes, the nature of the alleged offences committed by the Petitioner is one and the same. The de-facto complainant in the subsequent FIR has figured as a witness in the first FIR. Following the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala¹ , it is submitted that registration of a second or subsequent FIRs in respect of the same transactions, whether for the same or different offences, is impermissible and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶32

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the FIR/complaint given by the de‑facto complainant in Cr.No.292 of 2025 shall be treated as a statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.,’)/Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Investigating Officer, and the proceedings in Cr.No.292 of 2025 of Ongole Taluk Police Station shall be taken up along with FIR No.114 of 2025 registered on the file

¶33

1 (2001) 6 SCC 181

¶34

4

¶35

of Satyanarayanapuram Police Station, Vijayawada, for the purpose of

¶36

common investigation and trial.

¶37