Petitioner sought quashing of a second FIR alleging it was a repeat of a prior case where FIR was quashed. Court held allegations in second FIR were totally different and required investigation. Petition dismissed at admission stage.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPCR No. 210 of 2014
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Shri Surfaraj Khan, Advocate. For State/Respondents : Shri Devendra Pratap Singh, Deputy Advocate General.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board
18-07-2019
2
3
documents that were seized in that case, have been again reseized in the present case, which shows that both the cases are similar. Therefore, the petition be admitted.
Sd/-
(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge
Aadil
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition seeking quashing of a second FIR based on different facts and allegations is maintainable in view of a prior order quashing a different FIR.
Whether the alleged repeat FIR in the present case is based on similar facts requiring investigation as claimed by the petitioner.
Ram Gopal Sahu
State of Chhattisgarh
Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
