Second complaint u/s 200 Cr.P.C. is maintainable, if first complaint is dismissed in default; SC.

Supreme Court of India

Justice U U Lalit & Justice Vineet Saran

The SC {SAMTA NAIDU & ANR. v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR.} holds that a second complaint is permissible depending upon how the complaint happened to be dismissed at the first instance. It was further laid down that if the dismissal of the complaint was not on merit but on default of the complainant to be present there is no bar in the complainant moving the Magistrate again with a second complaint on the same facts. But if the dismissal of the complaint under Section 203 of the Code was on merits the position could be different.

It was further held that if the earlier disposal of the complaint was on merits and in a manner known to law, the second complaint on “almost identical facts” which were raised in the first complaint would not be maintainable. What has been laid down by the SC is that “if the core of both the complaints is same”, the second complaint ought not to be entertained.

In the present case, the complaint was filed more than a year after the sale of the vehicle. It was held by the SC that the earlier complaint was dismissed after the Judicial Magistrate found that no prima facie case was made out; the earlier complaint was not disposed of on any technical ground; the material adverted to in the second complaint was only in the nature of supporting material; and the material relied upon in the second complaint was not such which could not have been procured earlier. Pertinently, the core allegations in both the complaints were identical. Accordingly, the SC set aside the decision of the High Court and dismiss Complaint Case No. 9226 of 2014 as not being maintainable. The appeal was allowed.