Introduction of the FIR (First Information Report under Cr. P.C,1973): Meaning of First Information Report: The term F.I.R has nowhere been defined under Cr. P.C it may, however, be defined as under: –
- It is particular details that are given to the officer in charge of the police station;
- The information must relate to a cognizable offence;
- It is a particular first in point of time;
- It is based on this information the investigation into the offence commences.
The information given to a police officer and reduced to writing as required by this section is called the “first information report”. The first information report is not mentioned in this code but a report recorded under this section is known as the “first information report”.
Where is the FIR lodged and what is the purpose?
Normally the crime committed is reported to the police station concerned, but that does not mean that it cannot be registered elsewhere.
Punati Ramubey vs. A.p. 1993
In a case of Punati Ramubey vs. A.p. 1993
The police constable refused to file the complaint on the ground that the said police station had no territorial jurisdiction over the place of the offence. Due to lack of territorial jurisdiction, the constable could not be prevented from recording information about a cognizable offence and forwarding it to the police station concerned.
The object of FIR
The purpose of the FIR is to complain of any offence/crime to a police officer so that criminal law can be implemented. Where an oral complaint revealing the commission of a cognizable offence has been made and police investigation has started on its basis and later on a second report is made in writing it has been held that the written report has to be considered as a statement u/s 161 and not as F.I.R. it cannot be used for corroboration of evincing of an informant.
Evidentiary value of FIR
It is settled law that F.I.R. is not substantive evidence. It is not the evidence. It is not the evidence of the facts that it mentions.
It is also well settled that unless a first information report can be tendered in evidence under any provision contained ii of the evidence act, such as a dying declaration u/s.32(1) as to the cause of the informant’s death, or as a part of the informant’s conduct u/s.8, it can ordinarily be used only to corroborate, contradict or discrediting (u/s 157, 145 and 155, evidence act) if examined, and not any other witness.
It cannot be relied upon when it is not tendered by the prosecution under section 157 of the Evidence Act, of 1872.
Information in cognizable offence
According to sec. 154(1) of Cr. P.C All information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence is given to the officer-in-charge of the police station. This segment has a ternary object that apprises the district magistrate and supdtt. Of police who are responsible for preserving the peace and safety of the district.
It is also pertinent to bring it to the notice of judicial officers before whom the case is ultimately tried. Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence given orally to an officer-in-charge of a police station shall be reduced in writing by him or under his direction.
Every such information, whether given in writing or orally or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it. The police officers prepare the entries of the essential substance thereof in the prescribed register available to them.
Copy/replicate the information
As recorded shall be given forthwith free of cost to the informant.
Refusal to record the information
If any officer-in-charge of a police station refuses to record the complaint, the informer may forward such information to the superintendent of police who shall, to his satisfaction, investigate the case himself or direct it to his sub-ordinate for the same further.
Gurpreet Singh vs. the State of Punjab, 2006
In the case of Gurpreet Singh vs. the State of Punjab, 2006
it was held that merely non-disclosure of the names of witnesses in the diary as well as the mortuary register cannot affect the prosecution case.
Information in Non-cognizable offence
According to section 155(1) any information relating to the commission of a non-cognizable offence is given to the officer-in-charge of a police station within the limits of such station, he shall enter cause or reason to be entered the substance of the detail in a book to be kept by such officer.
Section 155(2) without a magistrate order no police officer shall investigate a non-cognizable offence. Delay in filing F.I.R: delay in giving f.i.r can be condoned if there is a satisfactory explanation as held in Aprenjoseph vs. the State of Kerala,1973.
Ram jog vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1974
In the case of Ram Jog vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1974
The apex court held that whether the delay is so long as to cast a cloud of doubt on the actions of the prosecution case must depend upon a variety of actors
Power to investigate
Under section 156, the police are empowered to investigate a cognizable offence without the order of a magistrate or without a formal first information report. If the police do not investigate a cognizable offence, then under sec.156(3) of Cr.p.c the magistrate can order the investigation.
Abhyanand vs. Dinesh Chandra, 1968
In the case of Abhyanand vs. Dinesh Chandra, 1968
Section 156(2) provides that no police officer shall be proceeded against at any stage in such a case on the ground that the matter was under which such officer was not authorized to investigate.
Under section 156(3), any magistrate who is empowered under sec.190 may order such an investigation.
Differentiation between complaint & f.i.r.
- In a complaint, the allegation is made orally or in writing to a magistrate, whereas the first information is given to an officer-in-charge of a police station.
- A complaint may relate to a cognizable or non-cognizable offence; whereas the first information report must relate to a cognizable offence.
- A magistrate takes cognizance of an offence on a complaint made to him, but he cannot do so on a first information report.
- A complaint does not include the report of a police officer, whereas the first information of an offence may be given by anybody, including a police officer.
