AMITY UNIVERSITY

AMITY LAW SHOOL

Law of Crimes II- Code of Criminal Procedure (LAW223)

Assignment
On
First Information Report (F.I.R.)
Submitted to:

Ms. Anumeha Sahai

Submitted by:
Nagesh1

Yash Vardhan
B.A., LL.B (HONS.)
Semester- V
Section- B
A8111114088
-ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-

1 e-mail: yashvardhan.nagesh@student.amity.edu

I take this opportunity to express my profound gratitude and deep regards to my respected
teacher and guide Ms. Anumeha Sahai, Assistant Professor, Amity Law School for her
valuable guidance, scholarly inspiration, which she have extended to me for the successful
completion of this endeavour. Her efforts can be only better expressed by coming up to her
expectations.
I sincerely acknowledge the help rendered by the libraian of the Amity University, Whose
cordial relations helped me for successful completion of assignment.
I have thoroughly study on the topic First Information Report (F.I.R.)

Yash Vardhan Nagesh

B.A.,LL.B(HONS.) SEMESTER 5th

1 | Page

-TABLE OF CONTENTS-TABLE OF CASES-III

-INTRODUCTION-_______________________________________________________- 1 -COGNIZABLE & NON-COGNIZABLE OFFENCE-__________________________- 2 -MEANING OF F.I.R.-_____________________________________________________- 3 -OBJECT OF F.I.R.-_______________________________________________________- 4 -CONTENTS OF F.I.R.-____________________________________________________- 5 WHAT SHOULD BE MENTIONED IN THE F.I.R.?_________________________- 6 -REGISTRATION OF F.I.R.-_______________________________________________- 6 -PROOF OF F.I.R.-________________________________________________________- 8 -EVIDENTIARY VALUE-__________________________________________________- 8 F.I.R. by the Victim__________________________________________________- 9 F.I.R. by Witness___________________________________________________- 10 F.I.R. by Accused___________________________________________________- 10 -DELAY IN F.I.R.-_______________________________________________________- 11 -CONCLUSION-________________________________________________________- 14 -SUGGESTIONS-________________________________________________________- 15 -BIBLIOGRAPHY-______________________________________________________- 16 -

2 | Page

-TABLE OF CASESAghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar, A.I.R. 1966 SC 119.______________________________11

Amar Singh v. Balwinder Singh, (2003) 2 SCC 518.________________________________13
Apren Joseph v. State of Kerala, A.I.R. 1973 S.C. 1._________________________________5
Bishan v. State of Punjab, AIR 1975 SC 461_______________________________________6
Harpal singh v. State of H.P,(1981)1 SCC 560_____________________________________12
Hasib v. State of Bihar AIR 1972 SC 283__________________________________________6
Krishna Mochi v. State AIR 2002 SC 1965.________________________________________9
Kuthu Goala v. State of Assam, 1981 CrLJ 424_____________________________________9
Lachman v. State 1973 Cri LJ 1658(HP)__________________________________________9
Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P. (2014) 2SCC 1____________________________________3, 8
Meharaj Singh v. State of U.P., (1994) 5 SCC 188___________________________________6
Miyana Hassan Abdulla v.State of Gujarat AIR 1962 Guj 214__________________________9
Nalayan v. State of A.P., AIR 1975 SC 1252_______________________________________6
Nazir v. K.E., AIR 1945 PC 18__________________________________________________3
Paras Yadav v. State of Bihar, (1999) 2SCC 126___________________________________11
Shambhu Das v. State of Assam, AIR 2010 SC 3300________________________________10
Soma v. State of Gujrat, AIR 1975 SC 1453________________________________________3
State of Assam v. U.N. Rajkhowa, 1975 Cri LJ 354__________________________________9
State of Bombay v. Rusy Mistry, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 391_______________________________5
State of U.P. v. Bhagwant AIR 1964 SC 221_______________________________________4
State of U.P. v. Mukesh 1992 Cr. L.J. 527 (S.C.)____________________________________5
Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. v. Tapan Kr. Singh A.I.R. 2003 SC 4140________________6

3 | Page

-INTRODUCTIONIndian Criminal Procedure Code contains provisions to ensure protection of civil liberties.
These protections have been incorporated as a part of criminal procedure law even before the
enactment of the Indian Constitution. Principles of legality, presumption of innocence, etc.
which are a part of the Constitution were already there as part of the criminal procedure law.
The Criminal Procedure Code of 1973 provides for a detailed procedure when it comes to
dealing with criminal matters in our country. The criminal process in our country is divided
into many phases. One such phase is the pre-trial stage. This is the stage where the role of the
police is important. They investigate into any crime and collect evidence that is crucial to
prosecute the accused. Without proper evidence, the court will not convict the accused. In a
criminal trial, the facts lie scattered all over the record and are not readily available in one
single document. They have to be therefore collected from a multitude of papers. The earliest
version of the prosecution case is available in the First Information Report which is the
trigger point of action.

The requirement of registering FIR has also been examined by the court. Though in the case
of cognizable offences it has been ruled to be compulsory, the court carved out some areas
where its main rule may not be applicable. If the court was to strictly follow the theory that
the court alone has the power to determine the suitability of information for registration, it
should have stuck with it. Instead the court carved out exceptions having regard to the
realities of the situation. The fact remains that access to justice remains meaningful if only
this stage is overseen by the Magistrate3.
Another important issue with respect to FIR which has been worrying the Courts for quite a
long time is with respect to the anonymity in case of FIR, especially when FIR is given on
telephone. That is if in case the person who gives first information report on telephone does
not reveal his/her name, then, whether in such cases the FIR would be significant for the
investigative purpose. Also, what in case the information is vague or cryptic, whether it
would be admissible in such cases. These have been issues of great concern by the Courts and
many differing opinions have developed in the course of time.
2 Dhirendra Pal Varshini, How to Frame a Charge under the Penal Code and Other Criminal Acts, 2 nd
Edn., Eastern Book Co., Lucknow, 1994, p.2.
3 Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P. (2014) 2SCC 1
1 | Page

-COGNIZABLE & NON-COGNIZABLE OFFENCEThe earliest information given to the police which set the investigation in motion, and is
reduced to writing by latter is known as the First Information Report. 4 The object of the FIR
is to obtain early information about an alleged criminal act and to record circumstances
before there is time for them to be forgotten or embellished.

Though the FIR enables a police to start the investigation on the basis of information, the
Code draws a distinction between cognizable and non-cognizable offences.
a) A non-cognizable case is one under which a police officer can arrest a person only with a
warrant6. Cases falling under this category are usually petty offences or those of a less
serious character. If the information relates to a non-cognizable offence the police cannot start
investigation without the order of a Magistrate who is competent to try the case or commit it
for trial.
b) A cognizable case is one under which a police officer can arrest a person without a
warrant.7 These types of cases are usually those of a serious nature. Hence, the police are
vested with powers to arrest a person accused of such an offence without a warrant, and in
doing so, a procedural safeguard that is given to a person is done away with. The possible
rationale behind the removal of such a safeguard could be the fact that the police are expected
to act quickly in such cases and put the accused behind bars immediately. If the information
relates to a cognizable offence, the Police may at once start the investigation without the
order of a Magistrate,8 though the officer in charge of the police station has to send a report
about such information to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence.9

4 Soma v. State of Gujrat, AIR 1975 SC 1453

5 Nazir v. K.E., AIR 1945 PC 18
6 2(l) Cr Pc
7 2(c) Cr Pc
8 156 Cr Pc
9 157 Cr Pc
2 | Page

It must not be supposed however, that the police can investigate a cognizable offence only on
receipt of FIR. The very opening words of section 157(1) say that the investigation may be
started in any case the officer in charge of a police station has reason to suspect the
commission of a cognizable offence, from the information received or otherwise.10

-MEANING OF F.I.R.154. Information in cognizable cases. (1) Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally
to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his
direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given
in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it, and
the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as
the State Government may prescribe in this behalf.
Provided that if the information is given by the woman against whom an offence under
section 326A, section 326B, section 354, section 354A, section 354B, section 354C,
section 354D, section 376, section 376A, section 376B, section 376C, 376D, section 376E
or section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been committed or attempted,
then such information shall be recorded, by a woman police officer or any woman
officer; Provided further that
(a) in the event that the person against whom an offence under section 354, section
354A, section 354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, section 376A, section
376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376E or section 509 of the Indian Penal
Code is alleged to have been committed or attempted, is temporarily or permanently
mentally or physically disabled, then such information shall be recorded by a police
officer, at the residence of the person seeking to report such offence or at a convenient
place of such persons choice, in the presence of an interpreter or a special educator,
as the case may be;
(b) the recording of such information shall be video graphed;
(c) the police officer shall get the statement of the person recorded by a Judicial
Magistrate under clause (a) of sub-section (5A) of section 164 as soon as possible.
10 State of U.P. v. Bhagwant AIR 1964 SC 221
3 | Page

(2) A copy of the information as recorded under Sub-Section (1) shall be given forthwith, free
of cost, to the informant.
(3) Any person, aggrieved by a refusal on the part of an officer in charge of a police station
to record the information referred to in Sub-Section (1) may send the substance of such
information, in writing and by post, to the Superintendent of Police concerned who, if
satisfied that such information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, shall either
investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer
subordinate to him, in the manner provided by this Code, and such officer shall have all the
powers of an officer in charge of the police station in relation to that offence.
Chapter 12 of the CrPC deals with the power of the police to carry out investigation. The first
provision appearing under this chapter is S.154. This is the material provision that we are
concerned with. S.154 deals with information given to the police in cognizable cases and is
divided into three distinct parts.
First Information Report Commonly known as F.I.R is first and foremost important step to set
the criminal law in motion. Though the term F.I.R is nowhere mentioned in the code of
criminal procedure but information given under Section 154 of CrPC is popularly known as
F.I.R.11 It is nothing but the statement of the maker of the report at a police station before a
police officer recorded in the manner provided by the provisions of the Code. It is on the
basis of this report that investigation of cognizable offences commences under this section. 12
It was held in State of U.P. v. Mukesh 13 that F.I.R. is intimation about occurrence of incident.
Provision of section 154 makes possible that any person aware of the commission of any
cognizable offence may give information to the police and may, thereby set the criminal law
in motion. Such information is to be given to the officer in charge of the police station
having jurisdiction to investigate the offence. The information so received shall be recorded
in such form and manner as under provided in Section 154.This section is intended to ensure
the making of an accurate record of the information given to the police.

11 State of Bombay v. Rusy Mistry, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 391

12 Apren Joseph v. State of Kerala, A.I.R. 1973 S.C. 1.
13 State of U.P. v. Mukesh 1992 Cr. L.J. 527 (S.C.)
4 | Page

As has been discussed above, there is a distinction between how an investigation commences
in a cognizable case and a non-cognizable case. In simple terms, the First Information Report
(FIR) is the basis on which an investigation begins in a cognizable case.

-OBJECT OF F.I.R.The object of lodging the FIR is to obtain the earliest information regarding the circumstance
inn which the crime was committed, including the names of the actual culprits and the parts
played by them, the weapons, if any, used, as also the name of the eye-witnesses.14
The Supreme Court in Hasib v. State of Bihar15 has held that the object of FIR from the point
of view of the informant is to set the criminal law in motion and from the point of view of the
investigating authorities is to obtain information about the alleged criminal activity so as to
be able to take suitable steps for tracing and bringing to book the guilty party. The object is to
obtain early information of alleged criminal activity, to record the circumstances before there
is time for them to be forgotten or embellished. It must be recorded at once when it is given,
it would be improper to wait until it is ascertained that a crime has been committed.

-CONTENTS OF F.I.R.What section 154 requires is that information must be in relation to the commission of a
cognizable offence. It does not require that the information must give details of all elements
of the offence,16 or the weapon used or the names of the witnesses or even of the accused, if
the particulars given are sufficient for appreciation of the evidence.17
The Supreme Court in Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. v. Tapan Kr Singh

18

has stated that,

it is well settled that a First Information Report is not an encyclopedia, which must disclose
all facts and details relating to the offence reported. An informant may lodge a report about
the commission of an offence though he may not know the name of the victim or his
14 Meharaj Singh v. State of U.P., (1994) 5 SCC 188
15 Hasib v. State of Bihar AIR 1972 SC 283
16 Nalayan v. State of A.P., AIR 1975 SC 1252
17 Bishan v. State of Punjab, AIR 1975 SC 461
18 Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. v. Tapan Kr. Singh A.I.R. 2003 SC 4140.
5 | Page

assailant. He may not even know how the occurrence took place. A first informant need not
necessarily be an eye witness so as to be able to disclose in great details all aspects of the
offence committed. What is of significance is that the information given must disclose the
commission of a cognizable offence and the information so lodged must provide a basis for
the police officer to suspect the commission of a cognizable offence. At this stage it is enough
if the police officer on the basis of the information given suspects the commission of a
cognizable offence, and not that he must be convinced or satisfied that a cognizable offence
has been committed. If he has reasons to suspect, on the basis of information received, that a
cognizable offence may have been committed, he is bound to record the information and
conduct an investigation. At this stage it is also not necessary for him to satisfy himself about
the truthfulness of the information. It is only after a complete investigation that he may be
able to report on the truthfulness or otherwise of the information.
Similarly, even if the information does not furnish all the details, he must find out those
details in the course of investigation and collect all the necessary evidence. The information
given disclosing the commission of a cognizable offence only sets in motion the investigative
machinery, with a view to collect all necessary evidence, and thereafter to take action in
accordance with law. The true test is whether the information furnished provides a reason to
suspect the commission of an offence, which the concerned police officer is empowered
under Section 156 of the Code to investigate. If it does, he has no option but to record the
information and proceed to investigate the case either himself or depute any other competent
officer to conduct the investigation.
The question as to whether the report is true, whether it discloses full details regarding the
manner of occurrence, whether the accused is named, and whether there is sufficient evidence
to support the allegations are all matters which are alien to the consideration of the question
whether the report discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. Even if the information
does not give full details regarding these matters, the investigating officer is not absolved of
his duty to investigate the case and discover the true facts, if he can.

WHAT SHOULD BE MENTIONED IN THE F.I.R.?

Name and address.

Date, time and location of the incident being are reported.

6 | Page

The true facts of the incident as they occurred.

Name and description of the persons involved in the incident.

-REGISTRATION OF F.I.R.First Information Report (F.I.R.) can be filed by any person. He need not necessarily be the
victim or the injured or an eyewitness. First Information Report may be merely hearsay and
need not necessarily be given by the person who has first-hand knowledge of the facts. It can
be filed in the police station of the concerned area in whose jurisdiction the offence has
occurred. A first information report must be made to an officer-in-charge of a police station.
Procedure for filing an F.I.R:
When information about the commission of a cognizable offence is given orally, the
police must write it down.
It is our right as a person giving information or making a complaint to demand that the
information recorded by the police is read over to you.
Once the information has been recorded by the police, it must be signed by the person
giving the information.
We should sign the report only after verifying that the information recorded by the police
is as per the details given by you.
People who cannot read or write must put their left thumb impression on the document
after being satisfied that it is a correct record.
Always ask for a copy of the FIR. It is your right to get it free of cost.
The question whether it is obligatory for the police to register FIR on information given by an
informant has been answered in the affirmative by the five-member bench in Lalita Kumari
v. Govt. Of U.P.19 It has been categorically ruled that the provisions of Section 154 CrPC are
mandatory and the officer concerned is duty bound to register the case on the basis of
information disclosing commission cognizable offence. However, if no cognizable offence is
made out in the information given, then the FIR need not be registered immediately and the
police may conduct a preliminary verification for the limited purpose of ascertaining as to
whether a cognizable offence has been committed. It is worthwhile to emphasize here that
information to have the status of FIR under Section 154 must be an information relation to
19 Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P., (2014) 2 SCC 1
7 | Page

the commission of a cognizable offence and it must not be vague but definite enough to
enable the police to start investigation20.
In Lachman v. State21 the Court held that if oral information relating to the commission of a
cognizable offence is given to the police, but the same is not recorded and the police officer
proceeds to the scene of the offence and there records the statements of the witnesses, none of
such a statement would amount to FIR, because in such a case the real FIR was the
unrecorded oral information given to the police by the informant.

-PROOF OF F.I.R.Prosecution is bound to produce the FIR. Ordinarily it is the duty of the prosecution to put
information in the FIR. It has to be proved like any other document and it is usual to call the
informant for the purpose.22 The defense should not be debarred from using the FIR merely
because the prosecution did not formally prove it. When the first information orally given is
reduced to writing by a person and is signed by the informant, the handwriting of the former
and the signature of the latter have both to be proved. Mere countersignature of the document
by the police officer in charge does not prove the handwriting of the document. 23

FIR

attracts the operation of Section 35 of the Evidence Act, even though not signed by the
informant. Even if the FIR is not proved it would not be a ground for acquittal, but the case
would depend upon the evidence led by prosecution. Therefore the non-examination of the
informant cannot affect the prosecution case.24

-EVIDENTIARY VALUEThe statements made to the police are if three categoriesa) A statement which has been recorded as a First Information Report
20 State of Assam v. U.N. Rajkhowa, 1975 Cri LJ 354
21 Lachman v. State 1973 Cri LJ 1658(HP)
22 Kuthu Goala v. State of Assam, 1981 CrLJ 424
23 Miyana Hassan Abdulla v.State of Gujarat AIR 1962 Guj 214
24 Krishna Mochi v. State AIR 2002 SC 1965.
8 | Page

b) Statement recorded by the police in the course of investigation

c) A statement recorded by the police but not falling under the above (a) and (b) category

None of the above statements can be considered as substantive evidence, that is to say, as
evidence of facts stated therein. Because it is not made during trial, it is not given on oath,
nor is it tested by cross- examination. If the person making any such statement to the police
subsequently appears and gives evidence in court at the time of trial, his former statement
could , however be used to corroborate or to contradict his testimony according to the
provisions of the Indian Evidence Act.
Section 157 of the Evidence Act is as follows:
In order to corroborate the testimony of a witness, any former statement made by such a
witness relating to the same fact, at or about the time when the offence took place, or before
any authority legally competent to investigate the fact may be proved.
Further, Section 145 of the Evidence Act provides:
A witness may be crossed-examined as to previous statements made by him in writing or
reduced into writing, and relevant to matters in question, without such writing being shown
to him, or being proved; but if it is intended to contradict him by the writing, his attention
must, before writing can be proved, be called to those parts of it which are to be used for the
purpose of contradicting him.
The FIR is not substantive evidence, but it can be used to corroborate the informant under
Section 157 of the Evidence Act, or to contradict him under Section 145 of the Act, if the
informant is called as a witness at the time of trial. Obviously, the FIR cannot be used for the
purposes of corroborating or contradicting any witness other than the one lodging the FIR.25
F.I.R. by the Victim
When an FIR is lodged by the victim himself, then the following legal consequences with
regard to the evidentiary value of the FIR in the Court of Law arise:
1. Under Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, the Statements given in FIR may be used
to corroborate the statements given in the Court. The fact that victim lodged the FIR and
narrated the whole facts and circumstances of offence(s) allegedly committed against him
25 Shambhu Das v. State of Assam, AIR 2010 SC 3300
9 | Page

have great corroborative value when the victim being the Prosecution Witness (PW) comes
and testify before the Court during the trial.
2. Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 talks about cross-examination as to the
previous statements in writing by the Defense Lawyer. There are many instances when the
victim himself turns hostile. He does not support the prosecution story and thereby attracting
contradiction under section 145 of the Act.
3. The statements of a deceased recorded by a police officer in a routine manner as FIR and
not as a dying declaration can be taken as a dying declaration under section 32(1) of Indian
Evidence Act after the death of the injured if he was found to be in a fit health to make a
statement.26
F.I.R. by Witness
When an FIR is registered by a witness, then it can be treated as evidence in the following
manner:
1. The principle of Res Gestae27 would apply here. Even though the registration of FIR by
the witness is not an issue in itself, but it is so connected with the facts in issue that it forms
a part of the same transaction.
2. Under Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, the Statements given in FIR may be used
to corroborate the statements given in the Court.
3. The witness can be cross examined and contradicted under section 145 of the Indian
Evidence Act using the statements given by him in the FIR
4. The credibility of the witness can be impeached under Section 155 of the Indian Evidence
Act. When the Prosecution Witness does not support the prosecution version of facts and
case, he is termed as hostile witness and the Prosecution tries to impeach his reliability and
credibility by proving that the said witness has received bribe or has received any other
corrupt inducement to give the evidence and thereby rendering him futile for the Defense
side as well.

26 Paras Yadav v. State of Bihar, (1999) 2SCC 126

27 6 Indian Evidence Act 1872.
10 | P a g e

 F.I.R. by Accused
In Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar28 it was stated that when the accused himself gives the
first information, the fact of his giving the information is admissible against him as evidence
of his conduct under section 8 of the Evidence Act. If the informational is not confessional, it
is admissible against accused as an admission under section 21 of Evidence Act and is
relevant. But confessional first information by the accused to a police officer cannot be used
against him in view of section 25 of the Evidence Act. No part of the confessional statement
is receivable in evidence except to the extent that the ban of section 25 is lifted by Section 27
of the same Act.
If the FIR by the accused contains facts relating to the motive, preparation and opportunity
to commit the crime it is impossible to say that such portion will be treated as no part of the
confession. The FIR can be used against the accused as evidence of his conduct under
section 8 of the Evidence Act in case where he himself has given the first information. Apart
from the above stated implications, it can be used to corroborate the statement made by
accused under section 157 and it can be used to cross examine and contradict the accused
under section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act.

-DELAY IN F.I.R.The First Information Report should be lodged with the police at the earliest opportunity
after the occurrence of cognizable offence .The object of insisting upon prompt lodging of
the report to the police is to obtain early information regarding the circumstances in which
crime was committed. Delay in lodging the FIR quite often gives birth to the suspicion that
FIR is result of afterthought, deliberation and consultation. Undue or unreasonable as well as
unexplained delay of lodging the FIR often gives fatal blow to the prosecution case.
There must be reasonable explanation of delay in lodging FIR. In a rape case, where the FIR
was lodged ten days after the incident, it was explained that as the honour of the family of
the prosecutrix was involved the members of the family had taken that time to decide
whether to take the matter to the court or not. This explanation for the delay was held to be
reasonable under the circumstances. Similarly, in a case where the relatives of the injured

28 Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar, A.I.R. 1966 SC 119.

11 | P a g e

person were anxious to provide immediate medical aid to him, the delay in their lodging the
FIR was considered as well explained. 29
When there is criticism on the ground that FIR in a case was delayed, the Court has to look
at the reason why there was such a delay. There can be a variety of genuine causes for FIR
lodgment to get delayed.
Rural people might be ignorant of the need for informing the police of a crime without any
lapse of time. This kind of mischief is not too uncommon among urban people also. They
might not immediately think of going to the police station.
Another possibility is due to lack to adequate transport facilities for the informers to
reach the police station.
The third, which is quite common bearing, is that the kith and kin of the deceased might
take some appreciable time to regain a certain level of tranquility of mind or
sedativeness of temper for moving to the police station for the purpose of furnishing the
requisite information.
Yet another cause can be, the persons who are supposed to give such information
themselves could be so physically impaired that the police had to reach them on getting
some nebulous information about the incident. There cannot be an exhausting catalogue of
instances which could cause delay in lodging the FIR.
There is no hard and fast rule that any delay in lodging the FIR would automatically render
the prosecution case doubtful. It necessarily depends upon facts and circumstances of each
case whether there has been any such delay in lodging the FIR which may cast doubt about
the veracity of the prosecution case and for this a host of circumstances like the condition of
the first informant, the nature of injuries sustained, the number of victims, the efforts made
to provide medical aid to them, the distance of the hospital and the police station, etc. have
to be taken into consideration. There is no mathematical formula by which an inference may
be drawn either way merely on account of delay in lodging of the FIR.30

29 Harpal singh v. State of H.P, (1981)1 SCC 560.

30 Amar Singh v. Balwinder Singh, (2003) 2 SCC 518.

12 | P a g e

Delay in lodging the FIR cannot be used as a ritualistic formula for doubting the prosecution
case and discarding the same solely on the ground of delay in lodging the first information
report. Delay has the effect of putting the Court on its guard to search if any plausible
explanation has been offered for the delay, and if offered, whether it is satisfactory or not. If
the prosecution fails to satisfactorily explain the delay and there is a possibility of
embellishment in the prosecution version on account of such delay, the delay would be fatal
to the prosecution. However, if the delay is explained to the satisfaction of the Court, the
delay cannot be itself be a ground for disbelieving and discarding the entire prosecution case.
The delay in lodging the FIR would put the Court on its guard to search if any plausible
explanation has been offered and if offered whether it is satisfactory.
Mohd. Ali v. State of U.P. [2015(3) SCALE 274] Decided On: 10.03.2015:
In this recent case, a minor girl of fourteen years was kidnapped and gang raped. The FIR
regarding the same was lodged after a delay of 11 days. The Supreme Court addressed this
issue of delay in lodging FIR as:
It is apt to mention here that in rapes cases the delay in filing the FIR by the prosecutrix or
by the parents in all circumstance is not of significance. The authorities of this Court have
granted adequate protection/allowance in that aspect regard being had to the trauma
suffered, the agony and anguish that create the turbulence in the mind of the victim, to
muster the courage to expose one in a conservative social milieu. Sometimes the fear of
social stigma and on occasions the availability of medical treatment to gain normalcy and
above all the psychological inner strength to undertake such a legal battle.

13 | P a g e

-CONCLUSIONIt is safe to infer that FIR is an important document because it sets the process of criminal
justice in motion. It is only after the FIR is registered in the police station that the police take
up investigation of the case. Anyone who knows about the commission of a cognizable
offence, including police officers, can file an FIR.
FIR has a great significant role in each criminal litigation. FIR, being an information first in
point of time, is a valuable piece of evidence in any criminal trial either for corroborating
evidence or for contradicting witnesses. Therefore, it is necessary that FIR must be recorded
in all circumstances especially where the person has arrived in the police station to lodge an
FIR against a particular crime. If a FIR is duly recorded, it may provide a valuable evidence
in a criminal case. Such information should be lodged with the police as soon as a person
comes to know as to the commission of an offence. Apart from prevention of crimes and
maintenance of law and order in the society, FIR may also lead to successful conclusion of a
criminal trial.

14 | P a g e

-SUGGESTIONS

FIR should be lodged immediately.

It should be recorded in first person.
Attitude / Behaviors towards the victim should be sympathetic. Aggression should be

avoided.
Technical words should be avoided and as far possible language of the informer /

complainant should be used. Hares language should not be used.

Written statement should be duly signed or thumb imprisoned.
Only a report of cognizable offence should be lodged in FIR.
Authentic information should be mentioned in the FIR. Unnecessary details should be

avoided. Over-writing /scoring should be avoided.

Arrived & Departure of the informer should be mentioned in the FIR as well as Daily

Dairy Register.
Delay, if any, in registering the case should be covered in FIR.
Description & Role of every accused involved in the Commission of offence should be

covered in FIR.
Kind of physical damage & property destroyed should be mentioned.
Weapon of offence and observation of Scene of crime should be mentioned in the FIR.
FIR should be lodged in neat & clean handwriting and be kept in safe custody being a
permanent record.
15 | P a g e

A copy of FIR should be provided to the complainant free of cost.

-BIBLIOGRAPHY-

S. No.
1.

-BOOKS REFERREDRATANLAL & DHEERAL LAL, Code of Criminal Procedure (Lexis Nexis)

S.N. MISRA, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Central Law Publications,
2.

S. No.

19th Edn., Reprint 2015)

-STATUTE REFERRED-

1.

The Code of Criminal Procedure,1973

2.

The Indian Evidence Act,1872

S. No.

-MISCELLANEOUS-

1.

http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/fir-1126-1.html

2.

https://ipc498a.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/first-information-report.pdf

16 | P a g e