Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 6

Question 6. What do you mean by FIR?

In what circumstances a Magistrate can make

an order for investigation of an offence? OR What are the ingredient of FIR? What are
the effects of delay in filing FIR?

INTRODCTION:-First information report and investigation plays an important role in

administering of criminal justice. It is expected that it should be recorded with utmost care
and caution. It should be recorded without any delay so that doubt does not arise. FIR &
Investigation determines that a prima facie case exist against the accused or not? Sections 154
of Cr.P.C.-1973 described in detail about FIR.


Although the definition of FIR is no given in the Cr.P.C. however it may be as follows:-

i) It is information which is given to the Police Officer In- charge of the Police
station. But it is not necessary to give always to Officer-in-charge. R. P. Kapoor v/s Sr.Partap
Singh Kairon, 1961.

ii) Information must relate to a cognizable offence.

iii) It is information first in point of time.

iv) It is on the basis of this information that investigation into the offence commences.

v) The FIR could be in any type i.e. written or oral. It can also be given on telephone.
Sunil v/s State of MP, 1997.

OBJECT OF F.I.R.:- The first and main object is to complain of any offence to a Police
Officer so that criminal law could be applied. Hasib v/s state of Bihar, 1972.

COMPONENT PART OF F.I.R.:- Generally it is essential that a detailed explanation of the

happening should be given in FIR. But the prosecution cannot be dismissed merely on the
basis that FIR does not contains the complete explanation of happening as in a case of
Navratan Mahanto v/s State of Bihar-1980. Only gist of the happening in factual position
needs to be mentioned.

ENTRIES IN THE FIR REGISTER:- As soon as the Officer-in-charge receives information

of commission of a cognizable offence entry to this effect must & immediately be made in
the Register concerned without delay. State of Haryana v/s Choudhary Bhajan Lal, 1992. If
any information is given orally, it should be recorded and then to read and obtained the
signature of the person giving information. As described in a case of State of A.P v/s P.
Ramulu, 1993 that FIR cannot be refused to be recorded on the ground that the offence was
committed not within the jurisdiction. There should be no delay in registering FIR. Delay
causes doubts. Gnash Bhawan Pated v/s State of Maharashtra, 1979.
Investigation begins with the FIR. If the FIR is regarding any non-cognizable offence then
such information shall be recorded in the concern register and the person who is giving the
information will be referred to the Magistrate. Meaning thereby that the investigation cannot
be done without the order of the Magistrate. Section 155 of the Code of criminal procedure
provides that:-

1. No Police Officer shall investigate a Non-cognizable case without the order of the
Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial.

2. Any Police officer receiving such order may exercise the same powers in respect of the
investigation (except the power to arrest without warrant) as an Officerin-charge of a police
station may exercise in cognizable case.

3. Where a case relates to two or more offences of which at least one is cognizable, the
same shall be deemed to be a cognizable case, notwithstanding that the other offences are

4. An investigation in a non-cognizable offence made under the order of Magistrate is

treated as in investigation under chapter-XII and the report will be submitted to the
Magistrate under section 173(2).

In cases of cognizable Offences, there is no need of the orders of the Magistrate to begin the
investigation. However it has also been made clear by the Supreme Court a new provision
under the code under section 155(4) which incorporates a view of Supreme Court that where
a case relates to two or more offences of which at least one is cognizable the case shall be
deemed to be a cognizable case, in-spite of the fact that other offences are non-cognizable,
where there are both cognizable and non-cognizable offences mixed together the Police
Officer can investigate even if there is single cognizable offence.
Question-7. Discuss the provisions relating to Information to the police and their powers
to investigate.

INTRODUCTION: - Section 154 speaks of information relating to the commission of a

cognizable offence given to an officer-in-charge of a Police Station. This section has a three-
fold object that to inform the District Magistrate and Supdtt. Of Police who are responsible
for maintaining peace and safety of the District. It is also pertinent to brought it in the notice
of judicial officers before whom the case is ultimately tried. And the most important to
safeguard the accused against subsequent variations or additions.

1. INFORMATION IN CONIZABE CASES:- 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.
Every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be
signed by the person giving it. The officers receiving make the entries of the substance
thereof in the prescribed Register available with him.

2. Copy of the Information as recorded shall be given forthwith free of cost to the

3. Refusal to record the information:- If any officer-in-charge of police station refuses to

record the information the informant may send to substance of such information to the
Supdtt. Of Police concern who further on his satisfaction will investigate the case himself or
direct to his subordinate.

4. The information given to Police Office and reduced to writing as required under the
section is called FIR. When any information discosing cognizable offence is laid before the
Officer I/c of a Police Station, he has no option but to register the case of that base as held in
State of Haryana v/s Ch.Bhajan Lal-1992.In a case of Gurpreet Singh v/s State of Punjab-
2006:- It was held that merely non-disclosure of the names of witnesses in the daily diary as
well as mortuary register cannot affect the prosecution of case.

Case State of A.P. v/s V.V. Panduranga Rao-2009: It was held that statement given on
telephone is to be treated as FIR because cryptic telephonic message of cognizable offence
received by Police would not constitute FIR. The mere fact that the telephonic message was
first in point of time does not by itself clothe it with character of FIR.

5. Where FIR is lodged and what Object:- Generally the information about the offence
committed is given to the Police Station of the place concern, but it does not mean that it
cannot be lodged elsewhere. In a case of Punati Raube v/s State of A.P.-1993: The police
constable refused to record the compalaint on the ground that the said police station had no
territorial jurisdiction over the place of crime. Any lack of territorial jurisdiction could not
have prevented the constable from recording information about the cognizable offence and
forwarding the same to concern police station.
6. The object of FIR: the main object of the FIR is to complain of any of the offence to a
Police officer so that criminal law could be applied. Where the FIR was found o have been
written after the inquest report was prepared the court held that it has lost its authenticity in
the case of Balaka Singh v/s State of Punjab-1975.

7. IMPORTANCE OF FIR:- On consideration its important from every angle it is noticed

that FIR is a very important from the occurrence of an offence. It should be given
immediately after the offence is committed. The delay in giving information is viewed with
grave suspicion as held in the case of Modivalappa -1966. There is no need to give the names
of witnesses or other minute detail.

8. Duty to register FIR:- In a case of Rajender Singh Katoch v/s Chandigarh Administration
& Others-2008, that although the officer-in-charge of Police station is legally bound to
register a FIR in term of sec.154. It was also held in Aleque Padamsee and Others v/s Union
of India-2007:- that in case of inaction of police officials in registering FIR person aggrieved
can adopt modalities contained in sec.190 read with 200 Cr.P.C by laying complaint before
the magistrate concern to take cognizance of offence.

9. Delay in filing FIR: - Delay in giving FIR can be condoned if there is satisfactory
explanation as held in Apren jospeh v/s State of Kerla-1973.

Whether the delay is so long as to throw a cloud of suspicion on deeds of the

prosecution case must be depend upon a variety of actors, Case Ram Jog v/s State of UP-

10. Delay in lodging FIR in rape cases:- In State Of Himachal Pradesh v/s Shreekant Shekari-
2004: That mere delay in lodging FIR does not anyway render prosecution version brittle.

11. Powers to investigate:-Under section156 the police is empowered to investigate into a

cognizable offence without order of a Magistrate or without a formal first information report.
If the police do not investigate the Magistrate can order for the investigation as in case of
Abhyanand Jha v/s Dinesh Chandra-1968. Sec. 156(2) provides that no proceeding of a
Police Officer in any such case shall at any stage be called in question on the ground that the
case was one which such officer was not empowered under this sec. to investigate, case Hari
Singh v/s State of UP-2006. Sec.156(3) Any magistrate is empowered under sec.190 may
order such an investigation , case Bateshwar Singh v/s State of Bihar-1992.
Question 8. Brief the Jurisdiction of criminal Courts in inquiries &Trials. OR Every
offence shall ordinarily be inquired and tried by court within the local limits of whose
jurisdiction It was committed. Explain the statement and state its exception.

INTRODUCTION: - A Magistrate within whose local jurisdiction the offence is committed

is competent to take cognizance and to try the case. The jurisdiction of the Magistrate does
not come to an end by transfer of the locality, where the crime was committed to another
district. The court having jurisdiction to try the offences committed in pursuance of the
conspiracy can try the offence of conspiracy even if it was committed outside its jurisdiction
under section 177.

It makes it clear that an offence shall be inquired and tried by a court within the local
limits of whose jurisdiction the offence was committed. B.Patnaik v/s Smt.Binand, 1970, it
was held that court decided that offences shall be tried by a court within the local limits of
whose jurisdiction the offence was committed.

1. Place of inquiry or trial in certain matters:- Sec.178, when it is uncertain in which of

several local areas an offences was committed. The offence is committed partly in one local
area and partly in another. Where an offence is continuing one and continues to be committed
in more local areas than one. Then it may be inquired or tried by a court having jurisdiction
over any of such local areas. State of M.P. v/s K.P.Ghiyara-1957.

2. Offence triable where act is done:- An act is an offence by reason of anything which has
been done and of a consequence which has ensued the offence may be inquired into or tried
by a court within whose local jurisdiction such thing has been done or such consequence has
ensued under sec. 179. Case Lal chand v/s State -1961is suitable example a gang was created
for dacoity in a district but was committed in another district, it was decided that the case can
be tried by the court of any of the two districts.

3. Place of trial act is offence by reason of relation to other offence:- When an act is an
offence by reason of its to any other act which is also an offence or which would be an
offence if the door were capable of committing an offence the offence which is done first may
be inquired into or tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction either act was done, under
sec.180. Munna Lal v/s State of Rajasthan-1964: committing theft and receiving stolen
property, such matter can be tried by a court of any of the two places.

4. Place of trial in case of certain offences:-Any offence of being a thug or murder

committed by a thug of dacoity, of dacoity with murder of belonging to a gang of dacoits or
of escaping from custody may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local
jurisdiction the offence was committed or the accused person is found. Under sec.181.
Jaswant Singh v/s Emperor, 1918, in a matter of abduction of married woman for the purpose
of unlawful intercourse, it can be tried that court within whose local jurisdiction the woman
was detained.
5. Offences committed by Letters etc:- Any offence which includes cheating may if the
deception is practiced by means of letters o telecommunication message be inquired into or
tried by any court within whose local jurisdiction such letters or messages were sent or were
received and may offence of cheating and dishonesty including delivery of property may be
inquired into or tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction the property was delivered by
the person deceived or was received by the accused person under sec.182. Tekumalla
Muneiah v/s C.B.Ammanamma, 1991: it was a case of bigamy the court held the complainant
could be entertained by the court having territorial jurisdiction over that place.

6. Offence committed on journey or voyage:- When an offence is committed while the

person by or against whom or the thing in respect of which the offence is committed is in the
course of performing a journey or voyage the offence may be inquired into or tried by a court
through or into whose local jurisdiction that person or thing passed in the course of that
journey or voyage, u/sec.183.

7. Place of trial for offences triable together:- Sec.184 says, where the offence committed
by any person are such that he may be charged with and tried at one trial for each such
offence by virtue of the provisions of seec.219 or sec.220 or sec.221. The offence or offences
committed by several persons are such that they may be charged with and tried together by
virtue of the provision of sec.223.Case: Pursottam Dalmiya v/s State of W.B.-1961.

8. Offences Committed Outside India:- When offences is committed outside India by a

citizen of India, whether on the high seas or elsewhere or by a person not being such citizen
on any ship or aircraft registered in India, he may be dealt with in respect of such offence as
if it had been committed at any place in India at which he may be found.

Похожие интересы