FIR and its Evidentiary Value

Introduction:

What would you do if you wake up one morning and got to know that dacoity has been caused in your neighbourhood? You might reach that place and try to understand the situation but ultimately you will ask whether or not the police have been called and informed about the commission of this offence. You will do this because you believe that in this situation the only authority which has the power to investigate the matter is the police. Here, you might think that you are seeking the help of the police but if we look at the other side of the coin we are helping the criminal justice system in reducing crime rates by giving them information about the crime. The first information that has been provided to the police is known as the First Information Report or FIR. It is the first step towards the investigation of any offence and hence, all of us need to have a basic understanding of this valuable tool that helps us in reaching the main culprits of any offence.

What is an FIR?

“The first information report is a report that provides information about a cognizable crime that has been committed by the accused.  It may be filed by the complainant or anyone else who knows about the crime. The main purpose is to make the criminal law effective and bring it into motion. Any information related to the commission of a cognizable crime must be simplified into writing by the person in charge of the police station, signed by the person who provided the information, and its content must be recorded in the books by such officer and kept in such manner as prescribed by the state government. The registration of FIR gives the person in charge of the police station the right to investigate crimes reported to him. A copy of the FIR needs to be sent to the Magistrate who has the power to take cognizance over that matter.”[1]

Types of FIR

First Information Report can be classified based on statutory provisions and informants (the person who give information about the incident)

Based on Informants

1. Victim- When information is given by the victim. (S. 154)
2. Accused- When information is given by the accused. (S. 154)
3. Third Person- When information is given by the person who is not a victim or an accused. (S. 154)
4. Police Authority- When a police officer receives information from someone and has a suspicion that a crime might have been committed. (S. 157r/w s.36)
5. Court- Any magistrate who is empowered to take cognizance over a case can order for investigation by taking suo moto action against an offence. (S. 156 (3), r/w s. 482)

Based on Statutory Provisions

1. Jurisdictional FIR- Every police station has its territorial jurisdiction and they are only empowered to file FIR against those cognizable cases which takes place within those territorial boundaries
2. Zero FIR- It is an FIR where the officer in charge of the police station can file and investigate the cases which are out of his jurisdiction. But later these cases will be transferred to the competent authority.

Conditions of Validity of an FIR

1. The offence that has been committed should be a cognizable offence in reality and not be mere circumstantial incidents.[2]
2. The information regarding offence should be given to the officer-in-charge of the police station or any other officer who is given the status of officer-in-charge of the police station by law.[3]
3. It should be the earliest report, recorded to the police station in writing with a view that he should take appropriate actions against it.[4]
4. It should be reduced in writing. If the information is provided to the officer orally, it should be reduced to written form by the officer himself or by any other person under his guidance.[5]
5. Once the information is reduced in writing it should be signed by the informant and read to him.[6]
6. Any information given after commencement of investigation will not be considered as F.I.R, so the information after which the investigation will be commenced by the police officer will be considered as F.I.R.[7]
7. The information should not be vague and indefinite.

Evidentiary Value of an FIR

No one is unaware of police’s third-degree torture; mostly this torture has been used to extract information from suspects and accused of a case. But in certain cases, it may be possible that police can torture a person to make him admit a particular crime even when the crime has not been committed by him. Since, police officers are also humans and not god, so there are chances that they may be biased while filing or investigating a case and to keep the process unbiased and unprejudiced the framers of law have furnished only a corroborative and not substantive value to F.I.Rs and all such statements which suspect, accused and witnesses make against them. To understand the evidentiary value of FIR in a better way let’s discuss section 157 and 145 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that

“Former statements of witness may be proved to corroborate later testimony as to the same fact—To corroborate the testimony of a witness, any former statement made by such witness relating to the same fact, at or about the time when the fact took place, or before any authority legally competent to investigate the fact, may be proved.”[8]

Under this section statement given by an informant, who is a witness at the time of trial, will only be used to corroborate him and will not be considered as substantive proof. It is necessary to file the FIR at the earliest opportunity after the commission of the cognizable offence. Any unnecessary or unreasonable delay in filing FIR gives rise to suspicion and may be considered as an opportunity by which the information can be fabricated, embroidered, or embellished. The early filing of FIR has been given so much importance to avoid any chance of colouring the story and the situations where the informant’s memory could fail.

Undue delay always imposes a duty on the courts that they have to examine possible motives and their effect on the trustworthiness of the prosecution’s story.[9] Since it is not possible for everyone to report the incident at the earliest opportunity certain situations have been put under exception by law. In rape cases, the question of reputation of family, fear, and trauma under which the victim would have been, and various other factors are involved which may result in a delay in filing FIR. The court considering all these reasons has even considered 10 days delay as reasonable and valid.[10] In other situations where the victim might have suffered various serious injuries and relatives are more concerned about providing medical aid to him, the delay in filing FIR will be considered as reasonable and well explained.[11]

Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that

“Cross-examination as to previous statements in writing—A witness may be cross-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 the writing can be proved, be called to those parts of it which are to be used to contradict him.”[12]

Under this section, the statements made by the informant, who was treated as a witness at the time of trial, can be used to contradict him. It may be possible that while filing the FIR, the names of the accused and witnesses may not be there this will not affect the significance of an FIR because it has been said that FIR is not an encyclopedia and each and every minute detail don’t need to be present in the FIR, if broad effects related to the prosecution’s case are present in the FIR then it will be considered sufficient[13]. The omission, on the face of it, should not be considered as fatal, its effect should be measured based on the alpha and omega of the circumstances. The mere absence of certain facts does not mean the non-existence of those and facts and cannot be considered as a doubt on the prosecution’s case.[14] When it comes to the omission of important facts, pertaining to the case, on which the prosecution case has relied; the court may consider such omission as important and may refuse to entertain any pieces of evidence on such fact.[15]

Taking into account Articles 157 and 145 of the Evidence Act, it is clear that FIR cannot be used to prove or contradict witnesses (instead of informants).[16] If the FIR was provided by the accused to the police, it would not be possible to use it as evidence or contradict itself. In addition, if the FIR is confessional in nature, it cannot provide evidence against the defendant because it will be hit by section 25 of the Evidence Act.[17]

For the purpose of evidence, the following situations have been determined as the uses of FIR, which are essentially non-confessional in nature-

1. Corroboration purpose: it cannot be completely ignored and can be used to corroborate the witness’s statement.
2. Contradict with the evidence provided by the informant.
3. To use it as an admission against the informant.
4. To refresh the informant’s memory.
5. To impeaching the credit of the informant.
6. To prove the conduct of the informant.
7. According to the provisions of Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872, an FIR can be used to determine the identity of the defendant, the witness, and the time of the scene as relevant facts.

When FIR is Treated as an Evidence

FIR may become important evidence in the following situations:

1. If during the declaration period, a person who died and has recorded his cause of death in the FIR (i.e. death statement) then the FIR can be accepted as evidence under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

2. When the injury was caused by the accused before the police officers at the police station and the injured person declared to SHO that the defendant was hurting him.

3. When the informant who has written or read the FIR does not remember the facts but ensures that the facts are correctly displayed in the FIR by him when he was writing or reading it.

Case Laws

• In Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar[18], four murders have been committed by the accused. The accused went to the police station with a murder weapon and registered FIR. The Supreme Court while deciding this case has divided the fardbeyan into 18 parts including inculpatory and exculpatory statements. The court further held that all the inculpatory parts of the statement are inadmissible as evidence as they are hit by section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act. It is observed by the court in this case that-

1. The information report itself is not substantive evidence.
2. If the informant is required to be a witness then it can be used to corroborate the informant under Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act or contradict Article 145 of the Evidence Act.
3. If the first information was provided by the defendant himself then according to Section 8 of the Evidence Act (MP PSC), the fact that the defendant provided the fact can be used as evidence of his behaviour.
4. If the information is non-confessional in nature then according to section 21 of the Evidence Act, the information can be accepted as an admission against the accused and will be relevant. 
5. However, given the provisions of section 25 of the Evidence Act, the first information report (of confessional nature) to the police cannot be used against the defendant.

• In Ravi Kumar v. State Of Punjab[19] evidentiary value of FIR has clearly been defined by Hon’ble Justice Ajit Pasayat. He said that “It has been held time and again that the FIR is not a substantive piece of evidence and can only be used to corroborate the statement of the maker under Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 or to contradict him under Section 145 of that Act. It can neither be used as evidence against the maker at the trial if he himself becomes an accused nor to corroborate or contradict other witnesses.”

• In Pancham Yadav and Anr. v. State Of U.P.[20] an FIR has been filed based on the information given by the victim. Later, when the victim could not sustain the injuries and died because of them the FIR was considered as dying declaration under section 32 (1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and was considered as a substantive piece of evidence.

Conclusion

This article has discussed the basic concepts of FIR with its evidentiary value. It could be said that FIR is an important report whose main objective is to record information about the commission of a crime. An FIR might not be considered as a substantive piece of evidence except in several cases such as in the case of a dying declaration but it can be used to corroborate the pieces of evidence and contradict the statements made by witnesses. Apart from these, FIR may be used to refresh the informant’s memory, prove the conduct of the informant, etc. So, it can be said that an FIR is very necessary to be recorded for the smooth working of our criminal justice system and to circumvent any chance of misusing its substantive value has not been provided to the FIR.

---

References:

[1] Ravi Kumar v. State of Punjab, 124 (2005) DLT 1

[2] Manimohan v. Emp., AIR 1931 Cal 745

[3] State v. Dewari, (1976) Crilj 262 (Or) DB; Belurkar v. State of Maharashtra (1975) Crilj 517 Bom FB

[4] Soma v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1975 SC 1453

[5] S. 154 (1)

[6] Ibid

[7] State of Bombay v. Rusy, AIR 1960 SC 391

[8] S. 157, IEA

[9] Apren Joseph v. State of Kerala, (1975) 5 SCC 114: 1973 SCC (Cri)

[10] Harpal Singh v. State of H.P., (1981) 1 SCC 560

[11] Ram Chandra v. State of Rajasthan, 1982 Cri LJ 36

[12] S. 145, IEA

[13] State of Madhya Pradesh v. Chhaakki Lal, AIR 2019 SC 381

[14] Mukesh v. State for NCT of Delhi, AIR 2017 SC 2161

[15] Ramjanam Singh v. State of Bihar, 1956 Cri Lj 1254

[16] Hasib v. Slate of Bihar, (1972) 4 SCC 773

[17] Nisar Ali v. State of U.P., 1957 Cri Lj 550

[18] AIR 1966 SC 119

[19] (2005) 9 SCC 315

[20] 1994 CriLJ 848