Criminal Law
I am practicing lawyer by profession and want to seek your kind and able guidance with respect to a position in which I am stuck.
Facts:
A complaint was filed by the wife against her husband and in-laws at ‘X’. The court in X took cognizance of the matter. In the initial stage the bail was granted by the High Court. However, after seven years when the charge-sheet was filed, regular bail was granted by the Trial Court.
The chargesheet filed by the Investigating Officer was protested by us, as the Court at X had no territorial jurisdiction. The Court after considering our submissions dropped the proceedings. It was held by the Court that the alleged offences occurred at place Y and not at X and therefore the Court at X will have no jurisdiction. However, simultaneously the complainant (wife) was granted opportunity to file a fresh complaint within the limit of which the cause of action took place.
My question is, if the wife decides to file a fresh complaint but with the same facts and circumstances, with the police station/court where the cause of action occurred, will all the accused have to seek bail all over again or whether the provision of section 462 Cr.P.C. would be applicable?
Secondly, if the wife decides to file the same complaint but with the correct police station/court will all the accused have to seek bail all over again.
Advice in this regard would be highly appreciated. Please also provide case-laws or citation, if any.
3 Replies
Yes, all the accused will have to seek bail, whether anticipatory or regular if a fresh complaint is made and an FIR registered against them at a police station situated at Y.
Logic being that bail is a remedy granted in respect of a specific offence. It does not have a washing over effect to other complaints, however similar they may be. Every fresh FIR results in a fresh criminal proceeding, and hence the accused will have to obtain bail afresh.
Explore the possibility of quashing the FIR at an early stage. The charge sheet filed in X should give you clues to show that the complaint is devoid of merit and deserves to be quashed.
I understand that what you are saying would be applicable when it is a fresh FIR. But in other scenario, if the complainant wishes to proceed with the same complaint, however file it with the proper court/Police Station at Y, will not section 462 of the CrPC be applicable?
According to you the Court at X has already set aside the trial in X jurisdiction. It was open to the complainant to argue S. 462 CrPC before the Court at X and say that trial at wrong place cannot be set aside unless it can be shown that the error has occasioned failure of justice… Once the proceedings have already been set aside, a fresh complaint will give rise to fresh proceedings to which your earlier bail order would not apply.