First Information Report is the very basis of all the criminal cases. Only after registration of the FIR, the investigating agency derives the power of investigation. So, the FIR is the basis and foundation of all criminal cases. Entire super-strecture of the prosecution is built up only on FIR. If FIR is subjected to close and critical examination, there should not be any point to suspect the genuineness of the FIR. Hence, the FIR is a very vital instrument, if prosecution takes care in registering the FIR, then only prosecution can stand and prove the case. If there arises doubt on the genuineness of the FIR entire prosecution will be rejected.
The defence has to closely and critically examine the FIR. If FIR is followed closely there will be some points to throw doubts over the prosecution case. Since the FIR is the foundation of criminal case every care has to be taken. If any doubt over the genuineness of FIR arises then the entire episode will get collapsed. So, the FIR is considered to be very vital document.
What is FIR
(i) An information relating to the commission of an offence if reported to an officer-in-charge of police station, is known as report. The substance of the same will be reduced into writing in a book prescribed by the State Government whether report is given orally or written, now that the said report turned into FIR.
(ii) The term FIR has not been defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure. Since, the investigation is being taken up on the report which is first report about the commission of crime, the same is popularly known as FIR.
(iii) An aggrieved person can set the machinery of criminal law into motion by giving information to the officer-in-charge of a police station. (Section 154 of Cr.P.C.)
(a) On receipt of such information if cognizable offence is made out, the officer-in-charge of police station has to register FIR and to take up investigation and to lay final report and he has no other option.
(b) If it is a non-cognizable offence, the Officer-in-charge of police station, (Section 155 of Cr.P.C.) he – (i) shall enter or cause to be entered the substance of the information in a book prescribed by the State Government (ii) shall refer the information to Magistrate. (iii) shall not investigate the matter without order of the Magistrate having power to try the case. (iv)has no power to arrest without warrant.
(c) If both cognizable offence and non-cognizable offences are reported in single complaint, the officer-in-charge of police station shall treat the same as cognizable one and to proceed further. (Section 155(4) of Cr.P.C.)
Duty of Police Officer
Whenever an officer-in-charge of a police station receives an
information regarding the commission of an offence he has to do the following :-
(a) the substance of the information whether given orally or in writing same has to be entered into the book as prescribed by the State Government.
(b) a copy of the information as received under Section 154(1) Cr.P.C., has to be given to the informant forthwith free of cost.
(c) without any delay FIR has to be forwarded to the jurisdictional Magistrate and superior officers.
(d) necessary entry has to be made in the general diary.
Points to be borne in mind when FIR is drawn up
i) fill up all the columns in the FIR so legibly and without any overwriting or corrections.
ii) the date and time of dispatch is to be mentioned.
iii) furnish a free copy of FIR and get signature in the relevant column.
[Datar Singh Vs. State of Punjab – 1974 Crl.L.J. 908 : AIR 1974 SC 1193 – https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/6379.pdf]
Murder trial – Section 302 IPC, S. 154, FIR – neatly written and detailed FIR alleged to have been written within an hour of the murder – held makes doubtful such fact of early reporting – absence of entry in FIR as to when it was sent to the Magistrate concerned held assume great significance and supports the defence plea that the FIR was drawn up much later than alleged.
Whether FIR can be lodged by eye-witness alone
Anybody can set the criminal law into motion; it need not be by an eye-witness. A report cannot be refused to be treated as FIR since it was based on hearsay.
[Hallu Vs. State ]– https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/6310.pdf
V. FIR – Whether substantive evidence
Strictly speaking FIR is nothing but a document which set the criminal law into motion; it can be used either to contradict or to corroborate the maker of the same in trial. So it is not a substantive evidence. [Dharma Rama Bhagare Vs State of Maharastra – https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/6639.pdf ]
VI. Whether all particulars to be mentioned in FIR
FIR is not an encyclopedia, so it need not contain all the minute details of the crime but it shall disclose an offence. Absence of details in FIR does not vitiate trial.
[Jagatarsingh Vs. State of TN – AIR 2009 SC 2490]
In FIR every minute detail need not to be mentioned. [Subhash Kumar Vs State of Uttarkhand – 2007 Crl.L.J 1247] FIR is not to be treated as an encyclopedia. Though FIR is not an encyclopedia at the same time it cannot be an empty document. If complaint is not written by defacto-complainant the scribe of the complaint has to be examined otherwise it is fatal. [Mirthagai Ali Vs. State – 1957 Crl.L.J. 550]
VII. Informant in FIR becomes accused
An FIR cannot be used against maker at the trial if he becomes an accused nor to corroborate or to contradict other witnesses. 7[Nishar Ali Vs. State]
VIII. Whether police officer can refuse to register FIR
If any information disclosing cognizable offence is reported to the Officer-in-charge of a police station, he has no option but to register FIR. Section 154 Cr.P.C. mandates registration of FIR. 8[Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh – https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/40960.pdf ]
IX. Whether delay in lodging FIR is fatal
In general earliest reporting of crime to police will eliminate the possibility of false implication. But at the same time delay in lodging FIR by itself is not sufficient to reject the entire prosecution version, unless there are clear indication of fabrication.
Zahoor Vs. State – AIR 1991 SC 40 ]–
In grave case there is a tendency of falsely implicating persons belonging to opposite factions. So it requires very careful and close scrutiny of FIR but it depends upon each and every case.
[State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Rakesh Kumar –
https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/34587.pdf ]
Witness taking injured to hospital then lodging FIR – There is no
delay – Not fatal.
[Tara Singh Vs. State – AIR 1991 SC 63] – Inordinate delay in registering and forwarding FIR to Court – Fatal to prosecution.
[Raja alias Rajendra Vs. State – 2008(2) MLJ 169]
[Mukesh Vs State (NCT of Delhi) – https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/44879.pdf]
Section 302 IPC – Barbaric Gang Rape – Death sentence –affirmed – FIR – delay whether fatal in all cirucumstance – delay in preferring complaint is not always fatal. Delay in setting the law into motion by lodging of complaint in court or FIR at police station is normally viewed by the courts with suspicion because there is possibility of concoction of evidence against an accused. Therefore, it becomes necessary for the prosecution to satisfactorily explain the delay. Whether the delay is so long as to throw a cloud of suspicion on the case of the prosecution would depend upon a variety of factors. Even a long delay can be condoned if the informant has no motive for implicating the accused.
X. Omission of material fact in FIR
Though all minute details of occurrence need not be mentioned in FIR, material facts such as name of accused, name of witnesses, type of weapon, whether dying declaration recorded and events affecting the very nature of the case are to be given in FIR itself.
Omission in FIR is not fatal but if it is material to unfold the prosecution case it’s omission will be viewed seriously. Omission affecting the probability of the case becomes relevant u/s. 11 of Evidence Act in judging the prosecution case.
(1) [Ramkumar Pande Vs. State of TN – AIR 1975 SC 1026]
Omission of important material fact in FIR verify the argument that it was an afterthought and after due deliberation and consultation.
[Oma Bhai Chand Vs. State – AIR 1982 SC 1453].
[Kishan Chand Mangal Vs. State – AIR 1982 SC 1511]
XI. Delay in forwarding FIR
Delay is always affecting factor unless it is properly explained. But mere delay in lodging FIR is not necessarily fatal to the prosecution.
[Apren Joseph Vs. State of kerala – https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/6737.pdf]
[ Baijnathrai Vs State of Bihar – 2001(2) Crimes 591]
FIR to be sent forthwith to Magistrate competent to take cognizance – Delay in receipt of FIR by Court – Legitimate basis for suspecting that FIR was recorded much later than the alleged date.
There must be evidence to show that there is no delay in forwarding, so to explain the travel of FIR. Constable who took FIR to Court has to be examined as a witness.
XII. Cognizable offence reported – No FIR – Recourse
Section 154 Cr.P.C., mandates that whenever a cognizable offence is reported to an officer-in-charge of police station whether orally or in writing FIR has to be drawn up. If not registered, Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. lays down the remedy that complaint by aggrieved person can be sent by post to the Superintendent of Police. Further, petition can be filed before the jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate by invoking Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., praying to send the complaint to the concerned police station to register FIR and to take up investigation. Even after the order under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., if no FIR is registered, the aggrieved person can file petition before the Hon’ble High Court by invoking inherent powers conferred under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
XIII. Corrections in FIR
First Information Report is the very basis in all the criminal cases. Entire superstructure of the prosecution is built up only on such an FIR. If FIR is subjected to critical examination, there should not be any points to suspect the genuineness of the FIR. Hence, the FIR is a very vital document. If any correction or overwriting in FIR is found then same will be looked so carefully and there are every possibility to reject the entire prosecution case.
1. 19[Muralisamy @ Muralidaran Vs. State of TN – 2007 MLJ(I)(Crl.) 796
2. 20[Senthilkumar Vs. State of TN – 2007 MLJ (II) (Crl.) 153
3. 21[Ayyadurai Vs. State of TN – 2008 MLJ (III) (Crl.) 257
Prompt FIR
When FIR is lodged immediately after the occurrence there will be no scope for false implication or fabrication.
[Laxmanan Vs. State – 2002 SAR (Crl) Supp. 198]
Mere prompt lodging of an FIR by itself would not necessarily lead to inference that it is true. 1989 Crl.L.J. (NOC) 206.
Evidentiary value of FIR
The First Information Report is not a substantive piece of evidence, it is an information of a cognizable offence, any such statement can be used either to corroborate or to contradict the maker of it. If informant died FIR cannot be used even for corroboration or contradiction.
[Harkisat Singh Vs State of Punjab – https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/13902.pdf]
XVI. Telephonic message
FIR can be registered on any information so if any information reporting of a cognizable offence the same can be treated as FIR but on anonymous telephonic message or on a cryptic message FIR cannot be registered.
24 [Balgopal Panda and others Vs State – 1990 Crl.L.J. 1848 (Ori)]
25 [TAPINDER Singh Vs State of Punjab – https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/1387.pdf ]
Test to find out whether FIR is genuine
To check the geniuses of FIR, the Hon’ble Apex Court has given external check points in the following case.
[Gouri Shankar Swamigal Vs. State of Karnataka – 2009 Crl.L.J. 3042]
[Mahadevan and others Vs. State of Tamilnadu CDJ 2012 MHC 3953]
Cr.P.C. – 154 – FIR – Factors to consider whether FIR is genuine.
1) It was a very good handwriting
2) It was written systematically
3) There was no mistake
4) There was no hesitation in writing
5) It was absolutely, Neat and clean
There was an improvement in 161(3) Cr.P.C. statement when complainant is a student of 9th Standard. The above factors were considered and appeal was allowed, conviction set aside.
[Datar Singh Vs. State of Punjab – 1974 Crl.L.J. 908 : AIR 1974 SC 1193] – Section 154 – FIR – Neatly written and detailed FIR alleged to have been written within an hour of the murder held makes doubtful such fact of early reporting. Absence of entry in FIR as to when it was sent to Magistrate concerned, held, assumes great significance and supports the defence plea that the FIR was drawn up much later than alleged.
When the very origin or the genesis of the FIR itself is doubtful the prosecution case cannot be believed. The original complaint if suppressed the entire prosecution must fail.
[Pattu @ Patturaj Vs. State of TN – 2009(1) MLJ (Crl.) 133]
Contradiction in filing complaint is also a material thing to assault on FIR to doubt the genuineness of FIR.
[Anandan @ Anandakumar – 2008 MLJ Crl. 8]
Entitlement of accused in getting FIR
(1) Whether accused is entitled to get certified copy of FIR pending investigation was the question. In earlier days accused was not furnished with copy of FIR pending investigation on the ground that it is a secret document and not public document within the meaning of Section 74 of Evidence Act and pending investigation accused is not eligible to get it. Now it has been decided that since FIR is a public document as per Section 76 of Indian Evidence Act accused is entitled to get certified copy of FIR. Accused has a right to know what the allegations are made against him and to defend him it is just and necessary to furnish FIR to the accused.
(2) At the end of 19th Century a similar issue whether FIR to be furnished to the accused before trial was raised. It was decided by the Full Bench of Madras High Court consisting four judges, two of the four learned Judges held that the reports under Section 173 Cr.P.C., were not public documents, whilst the other two learned Judges held that report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., were public documents and, therefore, the accused was entitled to have a copy of the same.
[Queen Empress Vs. Arumugam – ILR 20 Mad. 189 ]
Now the law is well settled after 100 years that an accused is entitled to get certified copy of FIR before filing of charge-sheet.
[Selvanathan @ Raghavan Vs. State of TN – 1988 Crl.L.W. 503 FB ]
[Chinnappa Anandappa Siddareddy Vs. State of TN – 1980 Crl.L.J. 1022.]
[Jayanthibai Vs. State – AIR 2001 SC 2637]
Complainant and I.O. one and same – Effect
No doubt complaint can be lodged by anybody and can set the law into motion but if an officer-in-charge of a police station gives complaint and take up investigation. By applying natural justice that nobody can be the judge of his own case the entire investigation will be looked in such a way and accused will also be prejudiced. Anyhow in some of the cases it has been decided as so. [Thana Ram Vs State of Haryana
Second FIR – Legality
There cannot be any second FIR any such statement will be hit by Section 162 Cr.P.C.
[T.T.Antony Vs State of Kerala – https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/17830.pdf]-
Whether second FIR is permissible for same subject matter under Cr.P.C.?
(No) Whether the accused can ask for quashing of FIR – (yes) (2)
[Bubana Nayan Vs State of Orissa-2005 Crl.L.J 2524 (Ori)]
(xxi) FIR – when becomes dying declaration
31. Strictly speaking FIR can be used to contradict or to corroborate the maker of it since the same is not substantive evidence. If the maker died the same will be considered as dying declaration provided it must pass the test of close scrutiny, it shall be free from all doubts. [Damodar Vs. State of TN – AIR 1972 SC 622]
Dying Declaration not mentioned in FIR
If informant is aware of fact that dying declaration was recorded already and then only made his complaint the fact of dying declaration has to be mentioned. If he is not aware it is then it is not fatal.
CRAMPED handwriting in FIR
To find out whether complaint is genuine or not one of the tests is that the complaint must be free from all doubts. If a complaint is written in a blank-signed paper the same can be identified and will be fatal to the prosecution.
[Rajeevan V. State of Kerala – AIR 2003 SC 1813 ]
That Exhibit P-1 First Information statement given by PW-1 also seemed to have been written on a blank-signed paper, this inference was drawn due to the cramped handwriting in the paper towards the end portion just above the signature though there was adequate space in the next page coupled with the fact of delay – appeal against acquittal was dismissed.
Improvement in trial than FIR
[Durja and others Vs State of UP] – Improvements by witnesses from FIR and statements u/s. 161 Cr.P.C. FIR did not contain fact that appellants were armed with weapons when they accompanied the deceased – Conviction set aside.
Quashment of FIR
1) FIR is an instrument which set the criminal law into motion. So in FIR there must be prima facie case. If no prima facie case is made out the First information Report can be quashed by invoking the inherent powers conferred u/s. 482 Cr.P.C., on the Hon’ble High Court.
2) In the interest of justice and to secure the ends of justice even in a case where law does not permit parties to compound the offences, can be permitted to compromise and FIR can be quashed.
[Prakash Vs. State – 2008(II) CTC 220 ]
Parties in a criminal case u/s. 406, 420, 385 IPC settled their dispute in a compromise purely personnel not involved any public fit case to quash FIR – FIR quashed.
[Prakash Jain Vs. State – 2008 (3) Crimes 623]
Enquiry without registering FIR – Whether legal?
Prosecuting agency is deriving power of investigation only after registering FIR, before registering FIR there can be no enquiry whatsoever even to verify the allegations true or not. Considering the conflicting whether decisions by the Apex Court the matter has been referred to larger Bench by the Hon’ble Apex Court.
[Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh – 2009(2) SCC Crl. 812]
Now, the constitutional Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that if cognizable offence is made out FIR has to be registered in [Lalita Kumari Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh – 2013(3) MWN (Crl.) 321 (SC) –Failure to register case – There could not have been any enquiry without registration of case – Could not be denied on the basis of any such alleged inquiry – Direction given to the police.
[Mohindro Vs State of Punjab – 2001 (3) Crimes 190 SC (1) Cognizable offence – FIR – Police officer duty bound to register a case and investigate the matter – No preliminary enquiry needed.
[Pawn @ Tamatar Vs Ramprakash Pandy and another 2002 (2) Crimes 427 : 2000 Crl.L.J. 3311
No cross-examination on this point of delay – can delay be a point in favour of accused?
We must put relevant questions to the defacto-complainant and officer who had registered the FIR as well as Investigation Officer regarding the travel of FIR unless there is a definite case by defence that the delay is wanton and by that FIR was fabricated delay will not be fatal to prosecution. There must be definite evidence regarding the travel of FIR to concerned officer, concerned Head Constable has to be examined to explain the delay if any or to show that there is no delay. In order to get the delay as point in favour of delay there must be a question challenging the genuineness of FIR.
[State of Punjab Vs. Mohindar Singh https://main.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/29592.pdf ]
State preferred appeal against acquittal under Section 154 Cr.P.C., – Delay in giving FIR – explanation – No cross-examination on this point – can delay be a point in favour of accused – No held, the High Court has wrongly recorded that there was no explanation for the delay in lodging FIR. In FIR it has been categorically stated that nobody came forward to accompany the complainant to police station in the dark night. Therefore, she had to wait till the morning to come to the police station. No cross-examination regarding the reason for delay. There was not even a suggestion that she had wrongly stated about the reasons for delay. Therefore, conclusion of High Court is unsustainable – appeal allowed – Conviction restored.
[State of Utter Pradesh Vs. Anil Singh – AIR 1988 SC 1998] Detailed report lodged soon after the occurrence – no cross-examination on the point – no fatal to the prosecution.
CONCLUSION :
Since, the FIR is very foundation of all criminal cases prosecution is expected to take more care so as to get success and the defence has to scrutinize the original complaint and FIR in the light of guidelines given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred to above so as to project their case.
