This section applies whenever an FIR is filed in more than one police station for the same incident.

Courts have clarified that the rule kicks in only once courts have formally taken cognizance of the offence, not at the mere FIR or investigation stage.

Any court can decide which one should proceed once there's a conflict.

Only the High Court (or, if the courts fall under different High Courts, the High Court where proceedings began first) has the authority to resolve this question.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Section 206

High Court to decide, in case of doubt, district where inquiry or trial shall take place

Where two or more Courts have taken cognizance of the same offence and a question arises as to which of them ought to inquire into or try that offence, the question shall be decided—§

(a) if the Courts are subordinate to the same High Court, by that High Court;§

(b) if the Courts are not subordinate to the same High Court, by the High Court within the local limits of whose appellate criminal jurisdiction the proceedings were first commenced, and thereupon all other proceedings in respect of that offence shall be discontinued.§

Why this exists

Criminal cases can sometimes be reported or registered in more than one place — for example, if an offence spans multiple districts or states, or if complaints are filed separately in different courts. Without a rule to sort this out, the same person could face parallel trials for the same act, wasting judicial resources and risking conflicting judgments. This provision, carried forward from Section 186 of the old Code of Criminal Procedure, gives a clear hierarchy: the relevant High Court steps in to pick one proper forum and shut down the rest.

How courts read it

Under the predecessor provision (CrPC Section 186), courts consistently held that the rule applies only when courts have genuinely 'taken cognizance' of the same offence, not merely when an FIR is registered in multiple places. High Courts have used this power to consolidate trials and avoid multiplicity of proceedings, often looking at where investigation is more advanced or where witnesses and evidence are concentrated, in the interest of a fair and efficient trial.

Common misconceptions

Myth: This section applies whenever an FIR is filed in more than one police station for the same incident.
Fact: Courts have clarified that the rule kicks in only once courts have formally taken cognizance of the offence, not at the mere FIR or investigation stage.
Myth: Any court can decide which one should proceed once there's a conflict.
Fact: Only the High Court (or, if the courts fall under different High Courts, the High Court where proceedings began first) has the authority to resolve this question.