TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court allows appeals, dismisses state's, quashes second FIR, directs further investigation. Emphasizes independence of judicial decisions.</h1> <h3>T.T. Antony Versus State of Kerala and Ors.</h3> The appeals filed by T.T. Antony and Damodaran P. & Ors. were allowed, while the appeals filed by the State of Kerala were dismissed. The Court ... - Issues Involved:1. Legality of the second FIR and subsequent investigation.2. Quashing of proceedings in Crime No. 268/97.3. Effect of the report of the K. Padmanabhan Commission of Inquiry.4. Justification for a fresh investigation by CBI.Summary:Legality of the Second FIR and Subsequent Investigation:The primary issue was whether the registration of a fresh case, Crime No. 268/97, by Kuthuparamba Police Station based on the DGP's letter dated July 2, 1997, constituted a valid second FIR under Section 154 Cr.P.C. The Court held that under the scheme of Cr.P.C., only the earliest or first information regarding the commission of a cognizable offence satisfies the requirements of Section 154 Cr.P.C. Thus, there can be no second FIR for the same incident or occurrence. The Court found that the second FIR registered in Crime No. 268/97 was irregular and the fresh investigation based on it was illegal. Consequently, the investigation and the report thereof were quashed.Quashing of Proceedings in Crime No. 268/97:The appellants argued for the quashing of proceedings in Crime No. 268/97 on the grounds that the allegations did not constitute any offence and were related to the discharge of official duties protected under Section 132 Cr.P.C. The Court found merit in these arguments and held that the investigation and proceedings based on the second FIR were invalid. The Court directed the investigating agency to seek permission in Crime Nos. 353/94 or 354/94 to make further investigations and file further reports under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C.Effect of the Report of the K. Padmanabhan Commission of Inquiry:The Court reiterated that the findings of a Commission of Inquiry are not binding on courts and do not have evidentiary value. The Commission's report is meant to inform the Government and guide administrative or legislative actions but does not preclude the investigating agency from forming its own opinion based on evidence obtained during the investigation. The Court emphasized that civil or criminal courts must arrive at their own decisions based on evidence presented before them, independent of the Commission's findings.Justification for a Fresh Investigation by CBI:Given the conclusion that the second FIR and subsequent investigation were invalid, the Court found it unnecessary to address the issue of directing a fresh investigation by CBI. The Court did not interfere with the High Court's judgment insofar as it quashed the proceedings against the ASP (R.A. Chandrasekhar) but set aside the High Court's judgment in all other aspects.Conclusion:The appeals filed by T.T. Antony and Damodaran P. & Ors. were allowed, and the appeals filed by the State of Kerala were dismissed. The Court quashed the second FIR and subsequent investigation, leaving it open for the investigating agency to seek further investigation in the original cases (Crime Nos. 353/94 and 354/94) under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
