The Rajasthan High Court, in an insightful decision, ruled that the police are within their rights to register a First Information Report (FIR) even if a private complaint regarding the same set of allegations is already under judicial consideration. Justice Arun Monga delivered this judgment while disposing of S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 4859/2024, which centered on allegations of corruption and procedural abuse in a government loan scheme.
The judgment sheds light on Section 233 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), aligning the procedural framework for addressing overlapping judicial and investigative actions. It emphasizes the harmonious coexistence of police investigations and private complaint trials, safeguarding procedural integrity.
Background of the Case
The case revolved around FIR No. 221/2023, registered at the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Jaipur (outpost Ajmer), against the petitioners, including Ram Chandra Bisu, a former Chairman of the Gram Seva Sahkari Samiti in Soodwad, Nagaur District, and his wife, Manju Devi. The allegations were brought by complainant Nainu Ram, who accused the petitioners of forging documents to sanction loans to their family members under false pretenses and subsequently exploiting a government loan waiver scheme. The estimated financial loss to the government was ₹8,24,383.
The petitioners sought to quash the FIR, arguing that the allegations in the complaint were identical to those in a previously filed private complaint (Complaint No. 06/2020) by the complainant’s late brother, Manohar Lal. That complaint, registered in the court of the ACJM, Degana, was already under trial. The petitioners contended that initiating another proceeding via an FIR would amount to duplicative legal action, violating principles of natural justice.
Legal Issues Before the Court
The petition raised critical questions about procedural law:
- Duplication of Proceedings: Can the police investigate an FIR when a private complaint regarding the same allegations is already under judicial process?
- Application of Section 233 of BNSS, 2023: Does the simultaneous existence of a private complaint and an FIR require one to be quashed, or can both proceed within the legal framework?
Petitioners’ Arguments
Represented by Senior Advocate Jagmal Singh Choudhary, assisted by Advocate Pradeep Choudhary, the petitioners argued that:
- The allegations in the FIR were identical to those in the private complaint filed in 2020, violating the principle of double jeopardy.
- Section 233 of BNSS mandates that private complaint proceedings should be prioritized over police investigations when both are based on the same facts.
The defense stressed that allowing simultaneous proceedings would lead to harassment and prejudice against the petitioners, disrupting judicial efficiency.
Respondents’ Counterarguments
Representing the State of Rajasthan, Public Prosecutor Vikram Singh Rajpurohit contended that:
- Section 233 of BNSS permits simultaneous proceedings, provided procedural safeguards are adhered to.
- Police investigations are critical for gathering evidence that private complaints might overlook, particularly in corruption cases.
The prosecution emphasized the necessity of the FIR to investigate the alleged misuse of government schemes and potential collusion by the accused with public officials.
Court’s Observations and Findings
Justice Arun Monga upheld the validity of the FIR while providing clarity on the procedural interplay between Section 233 of BNSS and the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The court observed:
“Even if the complaint proceedings have already been initiated and police officials receive a report on the same set of allegations, they are not barred from registering a subsequent FIR. The procedural mandate ensures fair adjudication without procedural overlap.”
The court highlighted that Section 233 provides a mechanism for resolving overlapping actions. It mandates that the Magistrate must stay the private complaint proceedings pending the outcome of the police investigation. This procedural framework ensures that both avenues are exhausted without compromising fairness or duplicating judicial resources.
The judgment further clarified:
“The Magistrate shall stay the inquiry or trial of the private complaint to await the police investigation’s outcome. This ensures that justice is served without procedural conflicts.”
Court’s Decision
The court disposed of the petition with the following directives:
- The private complaint proceedings (Complaint No. 06/2020) will remain stayed until the police investigation in FIR No. 221/2023 concludes.
- The investigating officers are to conduct their inquiry in accordance with Section 173 of BNSS, ensuring procedural fairness and thoroughness.
This decision ensures that the investigation into allegations of corruption and forgery proceeds unimpeded while respecting the judicial process initiated by the private complaint.
Key Takeaways from the Judgment
- Coexistence of Proceedings: The judgment underscores that private complaints and police investigations can coexist, provided procedural mandates are followed.
- Significance of Section 233 BNSS: It provides a roadmap for handling overlapping legal actions, ensuring that neither private complaints nor police investigations are prematurely dismissed.
- Precedent for Corruption Cases: The decision highlights the importance of comprehensive investigations, especially in cases involving public funds and government schemes.
Case Details
- Case Title: Ram Chandra Bisu & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan
- Case Number: S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 4859/2024
- Bench: Justice Arun Monga
- Petitioners’ Counsel: Senior Advocate Jagmal Singh Choudhary, assisted by Advocate Pradeep Choudhary
- Respondents’ Counsel: Public Prosecutor Vikram Singh Rajpurohit
