The Madras High Court stated that after an FIR has been filed against a person, the investigative agency should not be allowed to re-examine that individual merely by filing another FIR in relation to the same incident. The court was effectively addressing a motion under section 482 CrPC to overturn the state police's filing of an initial complaint (FIR) against the petitioner for violations of sections 468, 471, and 420 of the IPC. In 2015, an FIR was subsequently filed against him; however, the High Court later overturned the FIR. Despite this, the FIR was filed after the second respondent preferred to file a new complaint with an identical set of claims.
In the instant case titled K.J. Suriyanarayanan v. state the issue raised before the Madras High court was:
Can an FIR be a consideration if it had been registered on the same set of allegations?
With regard to the issue, the Madras High court held that it occasionally happens that a police officer in charge of a police station receives multiple pieces of information regarding a single incident involving one or more cognizable offences, but in such a case, the investigation officer need not include all of that information in the FIR. As a result, the Court added, subsequent FIRs filed in connection with the same or a connected cognizable offence cannot be considered counter cases.
The court categorically stated that:
"If such protection is not given to a suspect, then possibility of abuse of investigating powers by the police cannot be ruled out. It would result into a multiplicity of proceedings and unnecessary harassment to the accused and registration of multiple FIR's on the same occurrence would be hit by the doctrine of sameness and it would have to be obliterated, as it would amount to violation of fundamental rights of a citizen."
Hence, the entire proceedings registered by the first respondent police for offences under Sections 468, 471 and 420 of IPC is quashed as against the petitioner and this criminal original petition is allowed.