GOPAL S/O. BHIKCHAND AGRAWALversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

2026:BHC-AUG:19349-DB
                                           (1)                         appln-2831-2019.odt



                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                        CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2831 OF 2019

               Gopal S/o Bhikchand Agrawal,
               Age:- 45 Years, Occu:- Business,
               R/o. Behind Bhandari Talkies, Shirpur,
               Tq Shirpur, Dist Dhule.                                 ..Applicant
                                                                 (Original Accused)
                              Versus

               1.       The State of Maharashtra,


               2.    Nilesh S/o Mohan Mahajan,
                     Age: 30 Years, Occu:- Agriculture,
                     R/o Village Boradi Tq. Shirpur Dist Dhule.    ..Respondents
                                                             (Orig. Complainant)
                                                 …
               Mr. V. P. Raje, Advocate for the Applicant.
               Mr. S. A. Gaikwad, APP for Respondent No.1.
               Mr. D. S. Bagul, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
                                                …
                                         CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
               RESERVED ON   : 26th FEBRUARY, 2026.
               PRONOUNCED ON : 18th APRIL, 2026.

               JUDGMENT:-

               1.       The applicant seeks quashment of FIR in Crime No.179/2019

               registered with Shirpur Police Station, Dist. Dhule for offence

               punishable under Sections 420, 467, 406, 408, 465, 471, 504, 506

               r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code.


               2.       One   Nilesh   Mahajan      filed   Criminal     Miscellaneous

               Application No.312/2016 before Judicial Magistrate First Class at

               Shirpur seeking direction to register FIR under Section 156(3) of

               Code of Criminal Procedure. The Magistrate allowed application
                           (2)                      appln-2831-2019.odt



vide order dated 22.06.2016 and directed Police Station Officer,

Shirpur to register offence under Sections 420, 467, 471, 465, 34 of

Indian Penal Code against accused persons.         In deference to

aforesaid order, FIR in Crime No.179/2016 came to be registered

against in all 8 accused persons including applicant.


3.   In nutshell it has been alleged that agriculture land in Gut

Nos.78/1/A and 78/1/B situated at Boradi, Taluka Shirpur, District

Dhule is owned by informant.          The accused nos.1 and 2

manipulated NA order and shown division of plots in land record.

Eventually, they prepared false City Survey Record in connivance

with Government Officers. The land in question is of new tenure.

Till this date, name of informant is appearing in 7/12 extract.

However, accused persons on the basis of false and bogus record,

executed sale deeds of plots. It is alleged that accused nos.7 and 8

have prepared false documents and committed offence.


4.   Mr. Raje, learned Advocate appearing for applicant raises

two fold contentions. Firstly, he submits that already for same

allegation Crime No.150/2016 has been registered with Shirpur

Police Station. The applicant is made accused no.3 in that crime.

Therefore, second FIR for same offence is barred by law. Secondly,

he contends that even assuming that allegations in FIR are true

and correct, no offence can be made out against applicant.                He

would, therefore, submit that continuation of criminal proceeding
                              (3)                    appln-2831-2019.odt



on the basis of impugned FIR would be abuse of process of law and

seeks to invoke inherent powers of this Court to quash FIR.


5.       Mr. Gaikwad, learned APP and Mr. Bagul, learned Advocate

appearing for respondent no.2 do not dispute that for same set of

facts and allegations, FIR in Crime No.150/2016 has been

registered.       The learned APP informs that Investigating Officer

had submitted report to concerned Magistrate pointing out that

already FIR in Crime No.150/2016 is registered for very same

offence and, therefore, sought permission to close investigation in

Crime No.179/2016.


6.       In case of T. T. Antony Vs. State of Kerala & Others 1, it

has been well settled by Supreme Court that second FIR in case of

offence relating to same transaction is impermissible, except where

there are cross-cases or offences are disclosed, which were not part

of first FIR. Similar, analogy is considered by Supreme Court in

subsequent judgment in case of Amitbhai Anil Chandra Shah

Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another2.


7.       In present case, careful reading of FIR in Crime No.150/2016

alongwith present FIR, it can be observed that allegations in both

FIR relates to one and same transaction. The first FIR is filed by

one Mazhar Bismilla Bagwan against present informant, his

mother and two other accused, who were subsequently added i.e.
1    (2001) 6 SCC 181.
2    (2013) 6 SCC 348.
                           (4)                      appln-2831-2019.odt



present applicant and one Arun Ramdas Fulpagare. The present

FIR is lodged by informant against applicant and other seven

persons. However, allegations are very similar in nature in respect

of same property. It appears that, on completion of investigation in

Crime No.150/2016, charge-sheet is already filed.


8.   In aforesaid backdrop, it can be observed that there cannot be

a second FIR or a fresh investigation on receipt of subsequent

information in respect of same cognizable offence. Only one FIR

can be registered in respect of commission of cognizable offence on

basis of first information entered in Station Diary by officer in-

charge of Police Station under Section 154 of Code of Criminal

Procedure. Any subsequent information received thereafter would

be covered under Section 162 of Code of Criminal Procedure, and

officer in-charge of Police Station is duty bound not only to

investigate cognizable offence reported in FIR, but also other

connected offences found to have been committed in course of same

transaction or occurrence. It is obligatory on Investigating Officer

that even after submission of report under Section 173(2) of Code of

Criminal Procedure, if he come across any further information

pertaining to same incident, no investigation can be carried

without leave of Court and further evidence if collected in

pursuance to such information, can be made part of report under

Section 173(8) of Code of Criminal Procedure.
                             (5)                      appln-2831-2019.odt



9.       Analysis of factual scenario in present case would show that

although FIR was registered in Crime No.150/2016 for very same

transaction, subsequently informant had approached Magistrate by

filing Criminal Miscellaneous Application with same set of

information. The learned Magistrate was pleased to pass order

under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure. Eventually,

Crime No.179/2016 has been registered.         This Court finds that

Investigating Officer could have filed additional charge-sheet in

terms of Section 173(8) of Code of Criminal Procedure in

proceeding initiated vide FIR in Crime No.150/2016 after getting

necessary permission from learned Judicial Magistrate First Class.

Therefore, registration of second FIR in Crime No.179/2016 would

be illegal, particularly when applicant is made accused in previous

proceeding for one and same transaction.

10.      In result, this Court has no hesitation to hold that case is

made out to allow this application in exercise of inherent powers

under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

11.      In result, Criminal Application is allowed in terms of prayer

Clause (B) to the extent of applicant.



                                         (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)
                                                  JUDGE
Devendra/April-2026