Topic
Rajasthan High Court clarifies that double jeopardy under Article 20(2) does not bar multiple FIRs if the complainants and factual matrices differ, even for similar fraud allegations. The ruling reinforces that each victim’s grievance constitutes a separate offence, impacting fraud investigations and prosecutorial strategy.
Chhattisgarh High Court rules that registering multiple FIRs for the same cyber fraud transaction amounts to abuse of legal process under Section 482 of BNSS. The court granted anticipatory bail, emphasizing that identical facts cannot justify separate prosecutions, protecting accused from harassment and double jeopardy.
MP High Court grants anticipatory bail despite multiple FIRs registered on identical allegations of impersonation in police recruitment exams, holding that mere multiplicity of FIRs does not negate bail entitlement if investigation cooperation is assured. The ruling reinforces that anticipatory bail cannot be mechanically denied on grounds of multiple prosecutions arising from the same facts.
The Telangana High Court quashed an FIR against a petitioner for merely forwarding social media content, ruling that multiple FIRs for the same incident amount to abuse of process. The court held that absent intent to incite enmity or caste-based insult, such acts do not attract liability under BNS or the SC/ST (POA) Act, reinforcing protections against misuse of criminal law for political vendettas.