CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
FIRST INFORMATION REPORT-
Information to the police as to cognizable cases. Any person can give information to the police relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, and Section 154 of the Code provides for the manner in which such information is to be recorded. An analysis of Section 154 brings out the following points-
1. The information is to be given to an officer in charge of a police station having jurisdiction for investigating the case. [S. 154(I) ]
2. If the information is given orally to such officer, it shall be reduced to writing by the officer himself or under his direction. [S.I54(I )]
3. The information, if given in writing, or if reduced to as aforesaid, shall be signed by the informant. [ S.54 (I)]
4. The information as taken down in writing shall be read over to the informant. [S.154(1)]
5. The substance of the information is then to be entered by the police officer in a book kept by him in the prescribed form. [ S.154 (I)] This book is called Station Diary or General Diary ( see ,S.44 Police Act, 1861).
6. The informant then shall forthwith be given a copy of the information as recorded in the aforesaid manner. [Sec. 154(2)]
The statement of the informant as recorded under Section 154 is usually mentioned in practice as the first information report or popularly called as FIR. The principal object of the FIR from the point of view of the informant is to set the criminal law in motion." And the police cannot refuse to register the complaint. Nor can this power be usurped by the Magistrate. This object will be defeated if the police officer in charge of the police station refuses to record the information as required by the above stated provisions of Section 154(1). Therefore sub-section (3) of Section 154 provides a remedy in such a situation. According to Section 154(3), if any person is aggrieved by a refusal on the part of the police officer in charge of a police station to record the information, he may send by post the substance of such information in writing to the Superintendent of Police concerned. If the Superintendent is satisfied that the information discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, he shall either investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a subordinate police officer in the manner provided by the Code. Sub-section (3) of Section 154 further pro- vides that such subordinate police officer investigating the offence shall have all the powers of an officer in charge of police station in relation to that offence.
Registration of FIR
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. te has been categorically ruled that the provisions of Section 154(1) CrPC is mandatory and the officer concerned is duty bound to register the case on the basis of information disclosing commission of cognizable offence. In other words, it is a mandatory provision. 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. The court has mentioned some such areas as matrimonial family disputes, medical negligence cases, etc., etc.
The object sought to be achieved by registering information received in relation to the commission of a cognizable offence is that there cannot be any embellishment etc. later. The under-pinnings of compulsory registration of FIR is not only to ensure transparency in the criminal justice delivery system but also ensure judicial oversight.
The obligation to register FIR has several advantages viz. it is the first step to "access to justice" for a victim, it upholds the rule of law, it facilitates swift investigation, it avoids manipulation in criminal cases in several ways.
It is worthwhile to emphasise here that an information to have the status of FIR under Section 154 must be an information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence and it must not be vague but definite enough to enable the police to start investigation." It has also been clarified by the Supreme Court that since the word "information" in Section 154 is not qualified "reasonable" it is the duty of the police to register the information under Section 154.2" The Punjab and Haryana rules prescribe that the police "is bound to formally register a case and then investigate into the crime". It has been observed by the Supreme Court that "if the allegations made in the FIR are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety does not constitute an offence; the criminal proceedings instituted on the basis of such FIR should be quashed". Where an anonymous telephonic message did not disclose the names of the accused nor did it cognizable offence, it was held that such a disclose the commission of telephonic message could not be held as FIR
In Soma Bhai v. State of Gujarat, the complainant had made the report regarding the occurrence having taken place to PSI Patel, who, however, before reducing it into writing, by way of abundant caution, tried to seek further instructions from the main police station at Surat and booked a call to Surat. The message given to the Surat police station was too cryptic to constitute first information report within the meaning of Section 154 of the Code and was meant to be only for the purpose of getting further instructions. It was, therefore, held that the facts narrated to PSI Patel which were reduced into writing a few minutes later undoubtedly constituted the first information report in point of time made to the police in which necessary facts were given.
Sometimes it may happen that more than one person go at or about the same time and make statements to the police about the same cognizable offence. In such a situation the police officer will use common sense and record one of the statements as FIR. Case law on this question seems to show the trend of courts' acceptance of FIR as statements which give circumstances of the crime with a view that a police officer might proceed to investigate. However, if oral information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence is given to the police officer in charge of a police station, but the same is not recorded and the police officer proceeds to the scene of the offence and there records statements of witnesses, none of such statements would amount to FIR. Because in such a case the real FIR was the unrecorded oral information given to the police by the informant."
Evidentiary value of FIR-
A FIR means the information, by whomsoever given, to the officer in charge of a police station in relation to the commission of a cognizable offence and which is first in point of time and on the strength of which the s investigation into that offence is commenced. It is settled law that a FIR is not substantive evidence, that is to say, it is not evidence of the facts which it mentions. However, its importance as conveying the earliest information regarding the occurrence cannot be doubted.
Though the FIR is not substantive evidence, it can be used to corroborate the informant under Section 157, Evidence Act, 1872, or to contradict him under Section 145 of the Act, if the informant is called as a witness at the time of trial. It may however, become relevant under Section 8, Evidence Act. Section 157, Evidence Act is as follows:
Section 157. In order 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.
The FIR should be lodged with the police at the earliest opportunity after the occurrence of a 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 the crime was committed. Delay in lodging the FIR quite often results in embellishment which is a creature of afterthought and on account of delay, the report not only gets bereft of the advantage of spontaneity, but danger in of the introduction creeps in of the of coloured version, exaggerated account or concocted story as a result of deliberation and consultation and for these reasons, it is essential that delay in lodging the FIR should satisfactorily be explained. The FIR will the evidence of the informant on that fact." Non-disclosure in the FIR of the testimony in court wherein the informant knew from before, made his them, unworthy of credence.
The FIR can also be used for the cross-examination of the inform ant and for contradicting him. This is possible by relying on Section 145, Evidence Act which is as follows:
A witness may be cross-examined as to previous statements made by him in writing or reduced in 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 for the purpose of contradicting him.
Considering Sections 157 and 145, Evidence Act it is quite obvious that the FIR cannot be used for the purpose of corroborating or contradicting any witness other than the one lodging the FIR.
If the FIR is given to the police by the accused himself, it cannot possibly be used either for corroboration or contradiction. The accused cannot be the prosecution witness, and he would very rarely offer himself to be a defence witness under Section 315 of the Code. Moreover if the FIR is of a confessional nature it cannot be proved against the accused- informant as it would be hit by Section 25, Evidence Act.That section provides that "no confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence". If the FIR given by the accused is non-confessional, it may be admissible in evidence against the accused as an admission under Section 21, Evidence Act or as showing his conduct under Section 8, Evidence Act.
In certain cases the FIR can be used under Section 32(1), Evidence Act or under Section 8, Evidence Act as to the cause of the informant's death or as a part of the informant's conduct.
Types of FIR-
There are various types of FIR. The following are some of the most important ones:
1. General FIR-
A general FIR is one filed by the aggrieved party or the first party against another party in a general transaction at the nearest police station.
2. Zero FIR-
Zero FIR is given the number “0” (zero) instead of a serial number, hence the name. It is recorded regardless of the location where the crime was committed. After registering Zero FIR, the police station transmits it to the jurisdictional police station where the offence took place. When the appropriate police station receives the Zero FIR, it is assigned a serial number and turned into a regular FIR.
3. Cross FIR-
The other party (accused) may file an FIR against the complainant after the FIR is filed. This is called a cross FIR or counter FIR.
The filing of the counter FIR may be motivated by personal animosity or any malicious purpose to perplex the Court, or it may be used as a weapon to negotiate a future settlement and entice the complainant to retract the initial FIR.
4. Multiple FIR-
Multiple FIR is when aggrieved parties file multiple FIRs with the same cause of action. Multiple FIRs will be submitted only if the subsequent informer accounts for a completely new version of the alleged occurrence.
Importance of FIR-
The main goal of an FIR is to set the criminal law in motion and to gather information regarding alleged illegal behaviour so that appropriate steps can be taken to track down and prosecute the perpetrators. As a result, Sec. 154 has three objectives:
• To notify the Magistrate and the District S. P., who are in charge of the district’s peace and safety, of the crimes recorded at the police station;
• To inform the judicial officers who will ultimately hear the case what information was released immediately after the occurrence and what documents were used to begin the inquiry,
• To protect the accused from future modifications or any other additions.
Conclusion
FIR (First Information Report) is a document where the first information about the commission of a cognizable is recorded. It is important for both the person filing it and the Police. Its registration sets the criminal law into motion, and the Police start investigating the crime allegedly committed. The statement may be registered either orally or in writing. If the information is given orally, the Police officer must produce the orally given statement in writing and get it either signed or marked off the thumb impression of the informant.