Successive Petitions U/S 482 CrPC Not Entertainable If Filed Without Any Change Of Facts Or Circumstances: Rajasthan High Court Reiterates

Rajasthan High Court reiterated that there was no blanket rule against filing successive petitions under Section 482, CrPC, before the High Court, however, in such petitions it had to be seen whether there was any change in facts and circumstances that necessitated filing of the petition.

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand was hearing a criminal miscellaneous petition against the order of the Additional CJM wherein cognizance of offences was taken against the petitioners.

Against this order, a criminal revision petition was filed by the petitioners before the Additional Sessions Judge, but the same was rejected. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners had approached the Court earlier also, in 2021, by way of filing a criminal miscellaneous petition but the same was withdrawn to take all averments at the stage of framing of charges.

Thereafter, the petitioners again approached the Court by filing the present petition. It was the case of the petitioners that a false case was registered against them in light of an FIR filed by them, in which the police had submitted a negative final report. Against this, a protest petition was filed in which cognizance was taken against the petitioners. A revision petition was filed against the order, which was also rejected.

On the contrary, the public prosecutor argued that the police had not conducted the investigation in a fair and proper manner and therefore a protest petition was filed. After taking into account all the evidence, prima facie case was found to exist against the petitioners, and hence cognizance was taken.

After hearing the arguments, the Court perused the material available on record and observed that a “detailed reasoned and cogent order” was passed by the Trial Court as well as the Revisional Court. Furthermore, it was a settled position of law that at the time of taking cognizance, only prima facie case was required and not the correctness of allegations. Hence, no error was committed by the lower courts in taking cognizance.

Furthermore, the Court took into account the earlier petition filed by the petitioners before the Court in 2021 which was withdrawn and referred to the Supreme Court case of Bhisham Lal Verma v State of U.P. and Anr. in which it was held that,

“there is no blanket rule against filing of successive petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the High Court. It has also been held that if such a petition is filed, it must be seen whether there was any change in the facts and circumstances, necessitating filing of such petition.”

In this background, the Court stated that till date no charges were framed against the petitioners, and hence there was no change in the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, no successive petitions could be entertained based on the same ground.

Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.

Title: Sh. Mohanlal & Ors. v State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 16

Click Here To Read/Download Order