2.8.1 Nature and scope of FIR First Information Report is popularly known as ‘FIR’. It is a report of information that reaches the police first in point of time and that is why it is called the ‘first information report (FIR). First Information Report isa written document prepared by the police when they receive information about the commission ofa cognizable offence, which are serious in nature. It is generally apiece of information given to the police either by the victim of a cognizable offense or by someone on his/her behalf. Anyone can report the commission ofa cognizable offence either orally or in writing to the police. Thus, the First Scanned with CamScannerInformation Report can be filed by any person. The person need not Necessarily be the victim or the injured or an eye-witness, First Information Report may be merely hearsay and need not necessarily be given by the person who hag first hand knowledge of the facts. Sometimes the FIR may be lodged bya person who has secondhand knowledge of occurrence of the crime, 4 telephone call can also be treated as the basis for an FIR. Section 154 (1) provides that ifthe information is given orally to an officer-in. charge ofa police station, it shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction and it shall be read over to the informant. Every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing shall be signed by the person giving it. On receipt of this information police registers the report ina First Information Register and begins the investigation of the crime. Section 154 (2) provides that it is mandatory on the part of police to provide a copy of the FIR, free ofcost to the informant. Patai alias Krishna Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2010 Cri.LJ 2815, it has been held that the telephonic message to the Police station with a request to reach the place of occurrence cannot be treated as FIR. Ravindra Singh @ Dholiya v. State, AIR 2010 SC 2352, it has been held that the cryptic telephonic messages cannot be treated as FIR as their object was only to get police to scene of offence and not to register FIR. Surajit Sarkar v. State of W.B, (2013) 2 SCC 146, it has been held that cryptic telephonic information by an unknown person informing death ofan unknown person to police cannot be treated as FIR. Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2014) 2 SCC 1, in this case the issue was whether a police officer is bound to register a FIR upon receiving any information relating to commission ofa cognizable offence under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 or the police officer has the power to conduct a'preliminary inquiry’ in order to test the veracity of such information before registering the same. It has been held that there must be information and it must disclose cognizance offence. Thus Section 154 of the Code thus casts a statutory duty upon the police officer to register the case, as disclosed in the complaint, and then to proceed with the investigation. The mandate of Section 154 is manifestly clear that ifany information disclosing a cognizable offence is laid before an officer in charge of a police statio oe police officer has no other option except to register the case on the basis © such information. Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of U.P., 2014 Cri.LJ 470 (SC), it has been held Scanned with CamScannerthat Section 166A (c) lays down that ita Public 5 who fails to record any information to him under in relation to cognizable offences 354, 354B, 370, 370A, 376, 509, shall be punishable with ri be less than six months but may ervant i.c, a police officer Section 154 (1) of the Code punishable under Sections 3 26A, 326B, 376A, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376E or Section gorous imprisonment fora term which shall not extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine, 2.8.2. Importance of FIR FIR isa very import ‘ant document as it sets the process of criminal justice in ifter the FIR is registered in the Police station that the police ofa cognizable offence can file an FIR. It is not nect ofthe crime should file an FIR. A cognizable offense can also file an FIR. essary that only the victim Police officer who comes to know about a 2.8.3 Essential ingredients of FIR It must be an information given to the police The information must relate to a commission of cognizable offence It must be an information first in point of time Investigation must commence on the basis of such information It may be given by any person, need not be the victim of crime It must be given free of cost to the informant It must be entered in a book to be kept by police officer Contents of FIR The informant’s name and address Name and details of the people involved in the incident Time, date and exact location of the incident Precise facts and details of the incident Witnesses, ifany eae esp Rh MMP Boge 2.8.5 Refusal to register FIR Section 154 (3) provides that it is mandatory on the part of the police to *egister the FIR In all the cognizable offences. Ir the Police refuse 1 register the FIR, the informant may send the substance o fsuch information, in writing and by post to the Superintendent of Police. On receipt of such information in writing the Superintendent of Police, shall either investig te the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him. Scanned with CamScannerSuch subordinate officer shall have all the powers ofan officer in charge of the police station in relation to that offence. However, police may refuse 6 register the FIR only in non-cognizable offences. 2.8.6 FIRin non-cognizable offences Section 155 (2) provides that no police officer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case of commit the case for trial. Section 155 (3) provides that 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 officer in charge of police station may exercise in a cognizable case. Section 155 (4) provides 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, notwithstanding that the other offences are non cognizable. Dayal Singh and Others v. State of Uttaranchal, AIR 2012 SC 3046, during the course of trial, the learned Presiding Judge is expected to work objectively and ina correct perspective. Where the prosecution attempts to misdirect the trial on the basis of a perfunctory or designed defective investigation, there the Court is to be deeply cautious and ensure that despite such an attempt the determinative process is not sub-served by such defect. 2.8.7 FIR in cognizable offences Section 156 provides that a police officer has power to investigate into a congizable offence without the order of Magistrate or without a formal First Information Report. Ifthe police do not investigate, the Magistrate can order the investigation. Section 157 provides that where information as to commission ofa cognizable offence is received, the officer-in-charge of a police station has a right not to investigate, ifhe considers that there is no sufficient ground for such investigation. Madhao v. State of Maharashtra, (2013) 5 SCC 615, it has been held that when a Magistrate receives a complaint he is not bound to take cognizance ifthe facts alleged in the complaint disclose the commission ofan offence. The Magistrate has discretion in the matter. Ifona reading of the complaint, he finds that the allegations therein disclose a cognizable offence and the forwarding of the complaint to the police for investigation under Section | 56 (3) will be conducive to justice and save the valuable time of the Magistrate from being wasted in enquiring into a matter which was primarily the duty of the police investigate, he will be justified in adopting that course as an alternative (0 Scanned with CamScannertaking cognizance of the offence itself. As said earlier, in the case ofa complaint regarding the commission of cognizable offence, the power under Section 156 (3) can be invoked by the Magistrate before he takes cognizance of the offence under Section 190 (1)(a). Sukhwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2014 Cri.LJ 446, it has been held that the delay in sending special report to Magistrate does not in all cases make prosecution case doubtful. Sending of report is only on external check on working of police. Mrs. Priyanka Srivastava and Another v. State of U.P. and Others, AIR 2015 SC 1758, it has been observed that the power under Section 156 (3) warrants application of judicial mind. A Court of law is involved. It is not the police taking steps at the stage of Section 154 of the code. A litigant at his own whims cannot invoke the authority of the Magistrate. A principled and really grieved citizen with clean hands must have free access to invoke the said power. . 2.8.8 Evidentiary value of FIR Though the FIR is not substantive evidence, because a) it is not made during trial b) it is not given on oath c) it is not tested bycross examination. However, it can be used to corroborate the informant under Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 or to contradict him under Section 145 ofthe Act ifthe informant is called as ‘witness at the time of trial’. Pandurang Chandrakant Mhatre v. State of Maharashtra, (2009) 10 SCC 773, it has been held that the First Information Report is not a substantive piece of evidence and it can be used only to discredit the testimony of the maker thereof and it cannot be utilised for contradicting or discrediting the testimony of other witnesses. 2.8.9 Uses of FIR Even though FIR is not a substantive piece of evidence it can be used for; Corroborate the statement of the eyewitnesses Contradicting the evidence of person giving the information Proving as an admission against the informer Refteshing informer's memory Impeaching the credit of an informer Proving informer’s conduct Establishing identity ofaccused and witnesses mmoaogp Scanned with CamScanner2.8.10 FIR by accused Ifthe FIR is given to the police by the accused himself, it cannot possibly be used either for corroboration or contradiction because the accused cannot be a prosecution witness, and he would very rarely offer himself to be a defense witness under Section 315 of the code. 2.8.11 Suo moto registration of FIR - Following are some of the instances in which police officer can register the FIR on their own initiative. They are; a) When they: receive secret, anonymous, telegraphic and telephonic information about the commission ofa cognizable offence. b) When they get some direct knowledge about the commission ofa cognizable offence. c) When an occurrence of cognizable offence is exclusively detected by them and d) When a cognizable offence is committed in their very presence. 2.8.12 Delay in filing FIR An officer-in-charge ofa police station has to immediately register a First Information Report (FIR) based on a complaint or the information giver bya victim regarding any cognizable offence. Delay in lodging an FIR is fatal when not satisfactorily explained. The inordinate delay in registration of FIR casts a cloud of suspicion on the credibility of prosecution story. Delay in giving FIR can be condoned if there is satisfactory explanation. 2.8.13 Omission of the names of the accused, witnesses in FIR Ifthe name of the accused is omitted although known to the maker, the case against him becomes doubtful. Even though the name of the accused is not mentioned in FIR, an action can be taken against such omitted person. Thus, the absence of name of accused in FIR goes strongly in favour of accused and can be taken into consideration while determining probabilities of the case. Similarly there is no requirement of mentioning the names of all the witnesses in the FIR. V.K. Mishra and Another v. State of Uttarakhand and Another, AIR 2015 SC 3043, it has been held that FIR is not meant to be an encyclopedia nor is it expected to contain all the details of the prosecution case. It may be sufficient if the broad facts of the prosecution case are stated in the FIR. Complaint was lodged within few hours after the tragic event. PW-1 has lost his young daughter just married before six weeks in unnatural circumstances. Deathofa daughter within few days of the marriage, the effect on the mind of the father- Scanned with CamScannerPW] cannot be measured by any yardstick. While lodging the report, PW-1 must have been in great shock and mentally disturbed. Because of death of his young daughter being grief Stricken, it may not have occurred to PW-I to narrate all the details of payment of money and the dowry harassment meted out to his daughter. Unless there are indications of fabrication, prosecution version cannot be doubted, merely on the ground that FIR does not contain the details. 2.8.14 Second FIR Generally there must be only one FIR. Sometimes the Court may permit second FIR. If the second FIR relates the same incident in respect of the same occurrence or in regard to the incidents which are two or more parts of the same transaction it is not permissible and liable to be quashed. However, if the second FIR relates to the two different incidents or crimes, the Second FIR is permissible. Nirmal Singh Kahlon v. State of Punjab and Others, (2009) 1 SCC 441, it has been held that the second FIR would be maintainable not only because there were different versions but when new discovery is made on factual foundations. Chirra Shivraj v. State of A.P., AIR 2011 SC 604, it has been held that the there cannot be second FIR in respect of same offence. Further, information Teceived is always in furtherance pf first information Teport. At relevant time when deceased received bum injuries FIR registering offence under Section 307 of IPC has been roistered. Second FIR registered is not proper. Awadesh Kumar Jha @ Akhilesh Kumar Jha and Another v, The State of Bihar, AIR 2016 SC 373, the Court is of the view that the offences alleged to have committed by them are mentioned in second FIR, which offences are distinct offences committed by both the appellants and the same have no Connection with the offences for which the first FIR was registered against them. It is in truth and substance the same, registering the second FIR and making fresh investigation and forwarding report under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 will be irregular and the court cannot take Cognizance of the same. Scanned with CamScanner2.12.1 Nature and Scope of case diary Every Police Officer who is investigating a case must maintain a diary called ‘case diary’. It is also known as “special diary’ or ‘police station house diary’. Section 172 of the Code provides that every police officer making an investigation is to enter his proceedings ina diary and any criminal Court may send for the police diaries of a case under enquiry or trial in such Court and may use such diaries, not as evidence in the case, but to aid it in such enquiry or trial. 2.12.2 Object of case diary es ae Aye a As atl ire are tice eck tl oftreby yen 2.12.3 Contents of the case diary Case Diaries should contain only particulars of actual steps taken or progres made in the investigation and such details of investigation which have : ang on the case. Addresses, both present and permanent of the witnesses Scanned with CamScannerother relevant details should be invariably recorded in the Case Diaties. 2.12.4 Supplementary case diary (SCD) Every Investigating Officer, to whom part investigation ofa case is entrusted, will also maintain a Case Diary for the investigation made by him. This may be called ‘supplementary case diary’. SCDs will be taken on record by the Chief Investigating Officer, who may incorporate the gist ofimportant facts disclosed in such investigation in his own Case Diary for the date when the SCD is received by him. It is important that SCD must be submitted without any delay. A copy of the Case Diary submitted by Investigating Officer to the Superintendent of Police would invariably enclose the SCDs received by him, 2.12.5 Case diary is not evidence Case diary is only a record of day to day investigation of the investigating officer. Section 172 (2) prohibits the use of the diary as evidence in the case, Neither the accused nor his agent is entitled to call for such case-diary and also not entitled to see them during the course of enquiry or trial. The diaries can be used only for refreshing memory by investigating officer and Court can use it for the purpose of contradicting such police officer as per provision under Section 161 or Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Basant Singh and Others v, State of Bihar, 1985 Cri.LJ 1406, a Division Bench of High Court has observed that the use of the case diary by the Court must be within limitations and restricted ambit. Hence the case diary must be used for the following purposes. They are; a. Itis for aiding an enquiry or trial. b. Itshall not be used for corroboration c. Itshallnot be used for adopting of facts d. It should be used sparingly but not as a matter of: Tule e. Iflnvestigating Officer not examined benefit should be given to accused Mahabir Singh v. State of Haryana, AIR 2001 SC 2503, ithas been observed that Section 162 of the Code debars the Court from using the power under Section 172 of the Code for the purpose of explaining the contradiction in the evidence ofa witness. 2.12.6 Case dairy and its confidentiality Section 172 provides that neither the accused i entitled to call for case diaries maintained by nor his agents shall be the police nor shall he or they be entitled Scanned with CamScannerto see them merely because they are referred to by the Court. If the entire case diary is made available to the accused, it may cause serious prejudice to others and even affect the safety and security of those who have given statements under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 to the police, the confidentiality is always to be kept in the matter of criminal investigation ad it is not desirable to make available to the entire case diary to the accused. 2.12.7 Failure to maintain case diary Writing of case diary while investigating the matter is the duty of police officials, therefore, not writing the same amounts to misconduct. A contravention of Section 172 allows evidence of the police officer open to adverse criticism and may diminish its value; but it does not have the effect of making that evidence inadmissible and the trial is not vitiated in absence of prejudice. Scanned with CamScanner2.13.1 Nature and scope of police report Police Report is a report of police officer on completion of investigation. Section 173 provides that ‘police report’ means ‘a report forwarded by a police officer to a Magistrate’. Section 173 requires a final report of the police officer must submit to the Magistrate as soon as investigation is completed. It explains about an illegal activity or other situation. Every investigation by the police shall be completed without unnecessary delay. 2.13.2 Contents of police report The police report must contain the following particulars, Names of the parties Nature of the information Names of persons who are acquainted with the c Whether any offence appears to have been COI Whether the accused has been arrested? Whether he has been released on his bond and Whether he has been forwarded in custody ircumstances of case Tmamitted if so,by whom? with or without sureties? under Section | 70? mmronoge Scanned with CamScanner2.13.3 Purpose of police report The purpose ofa police Teport is to provide an accurate written account ofa police officer's observations during the investigation ofa criminal incident. A police report can only be written by the officer(s) involved in the investigation ofan incident. Each officer who makes a report must swear to its accuracy by signing it. 2.13.4 Magistrate not bound to accept final report ‘The Magistrate is not bound to accepta final report under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code, but he may go through the materials collected by the Police, and if satisfied that there is enough material to put up the case on trial, he may direct the police to submit a charge-sheet. 2.13.5 Unsatisfactory or incomplete investigation After considering the final report ifthe Magistrate feels that the investigation is unsatisfactory, or incomplete, or that there is scope for further investigation, it will be open to the Magistrate to decline to accept the final report and direct the police to make further investigation under Section 156 (3). Ifthe police officer by accident or by designs omits to forward the relevant documents/ statements of witnesses to the Court along with police report, it cannot be said that the charge sheet is incomplete or that no cognizance can be taken by the Court on the basis of such charge-sheet. 2.13.6 Further investigation permissible but reinvestigation is prohibited Further investigation is permissible. The law does not mandate taking of prior permission from the Magistrate for further investigation. Police has a statutory right to carry out further investigation even after filing of the charge sheet. No prior permission of Magistrate is required for further investigation. Police can carry out further investigation even after filing of the charge sheet. Thus, further investigation is permissible but reinvestigation without prior permission is prohibited. Hasan Bhai & Vali Bhai Quareshi v. State of Gujarat, AIR 2004 SC 2078, it has been held that the Magistrate before whom the trial was pending had the power to order further investigation even after charge was filed by the investigating agency. State of Andhra Pradesh v. A.S. Peter, (2008) 2 SCC 3 83, it has been held that ‘further investigation’ is the continuation ofthe earlier investigation and not a fresh investigation or re-investigation to be started ab initio wiping Scanned with CamScannerout the earlier investigation altogether. The Court further observed that Subsection (8) clearly envisage that on completion of further investigation the investigating agency has to forward to the Magistrate a 'further' report o; teports and not a fresh report or reports regarding the 'further' evidence obtained during such investigation, Vinay Tyagi v. Irshad Ali, (2013) 5 SCC 762, the Apex Court held that a) in exceptional circumstances, to achieve the ends of Justice the Magistrate can direct further investigation.; b) while exercising the power under Section 173 (8) the Magistrate cannot direct any other agency to conduct further investigation; c) the Magistrate does not have any Jurisdiction to direct reinvestigation. Only Courts of higher jurisdiction depending upon the facts and circumstances can direct reinvestigation or investigation-de-novo and d) further investigations conducted under the orders of the Court, including that of the Magistrate or by police ofits own accord and for valid reasons would lead to the filing ofa supplementary report. Such supplementary report shall be dealt with as part of the primary report. This is clear from the fact that the provisions of Section 173 (3) to 173 (6) would be applicable to such reports in terms of Section 173 (8) of the Code as laid down in Chandra Babu @Moses v. State through Inspector of Police, 2015 (7) SCALE 529. Dharam Pal v. State of Haryana and Others, AIR 2016 SC 618, Section 173 CrPC empowers the Police Officer conducting investigation to file a Teport on completion of the investigation with the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence. Section 173 (8) CrPC empowers the office- in-charge to conduct further investigation even after filing ofa report under Section 173 (2) CrPC ifhe obtains further evidence, oral or documentary. Thus, the power of the Police Officer under Section 173 (8) CrPC is unrestricted. Needless to say, the Magistrate has no power to interfere but it would be appropriate on the part of the investigating officer to inform the Court. 2.13.7 Supplementary reports Zulfigar Beg Alias Baby v, State of U.P. 1992 Cri,LJ 2067, it has been held that mere submission ofa police report docs not preclude further investigation inacrime by the investigating agency, Supplementary reports can be submitted by the investigating agency to the Magistrate notwithstanding that the Magistrate has taken cognizance of offence upon a police report submitted under Section 173 (2) of the Code. Narendra Kumar Amin v. CBI and Others, (2015) 2 SCC (Cri) 259, it Scanned with CamScannerhas been held that filing ofpolice report containing the particulars as mentioned under Section 173 (2) amounted to completion of filing of the report before the learned ACJM, cognizance is taken and registered the same. The contention ofthe appellant that the police report filed in this case is not as per the legal requirement under Section 173 (2) & (5) of CrPC which entitled him for default bail is rightly rejected by the High Court and does not call for any interference by this Court. Awadesh Kumar Jha @Akhilesh Kumar Jha and Another, AIR 2016 SC 373, it has been observed that it is even after submission of the police report on completion of the investigation, the police has a right to further investigation under Subsection (8) of Section 173 but not fresh investigation or reinvestigation. The meaning of further is additional, more, or supplemental. Further investigation, therefore, is the continuation of the earlier investigation and nota fresh investigation or reinvestigation to be. Scanned with CamScanner