ASHIM KUMAR ROY, J. - (1.) INVOKING section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the petitioners have approached this court for quashing of the FIR relating to Hare Street P.S. No. 624 of 2013 under section 406/420/120B IPC where they have arrayed as accused.
(2.) QUASHING has been sought for on the ground that the prior to the lodging of the impugned FIR, on the self -same facts, on a written complaint lodged by the de facto complainant in April 2011, the police registered another FIR being Hare Street P.S. case No. 228 of 2011 under section 420/120B IPC and same has already ended in charge -sheet for same offences against the petitioners. It was further pointed out that the said charge -sheet on being challenged before this Hon'ble High Court in CRR 835 of 2012, all further proceedings have been stayed till the final disposal of the said criminal revision which is still pending. To properly appreciate the case of the petitioner whether the allegations made in FIR relating to Hare Street P.S. Case No. 624 of 2013 and the Hare Street P.S. Case No. 228 of 2011 were same and identical, or not, what is first necessary, is to examine the content of both the FIRs. Now going through the content of both the FIRs, the impugned FIR, annexure P -1 and the earlier FIR annexure P -4, I find that the content of second FIR is a replica of the first one and the only difference that is found, is the chronological order in which the allegations was set out therein. The basic facts of both the cases are arising out of the self -same transactions and the allegations are identical. All the five petitioners who were arrayed as accused in the impugned FIR are also the accused in the first case, which has ended in charge -sheet against them and the de facto complainant in both the cases is common.
(3.) THE learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant/opposite party no. 2, could not able to point out any difference in the allegations made in the said FIRs nor disputed that both were arising out of the self -same transactions. The case of the petitioners remain uncontroverted.;