SURVEY OF CASES

FIR (FIRST INFORMATION REPORT)

SUBJECT: CRIMINAL LAW - II

SUBMITTED TO: PROF. MURALI KARNAM

FACULTY, CRIMINAL LAW

SUBMITTED BY: SUMER RAM

II YEAR III SEMESTER
2017-5LLB-55

NALSAR UNIVERSITY OF LAW, HYDERABAD

 Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 3

FACT QUESTION AND JUDGEMENT AROSE IN THE CASES ................................... 5

Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh ......................................................................... 5

Youth Bar Association of India Vs Union of India and Others ... ................................... 7

Anju Chaudhary vs State of U.P. & Anr ........................................................................... 8

CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 9
 INTRODUCTION

The word FIR (First Information Report) was evolved around 1885/86 in Germany and
the probable inventor of this FIR is Karl Benz. First Information Report is a written
document that was prepared by the police officer by the receiving of certain information
regarding the offence. The purpose of the filing FIR is to gives motion to the criminal
justice system1.FIR is not defined in the code. Although we can say that its information
given by the any person. That information not necessary given by the victim himself its
can be give by the any other person who have information regarding offence. He maybe
the not know the full fact of the case he may be hearsay; not necessary he will eye witness.
Information that given to the police in first point its relating to the cognizable in the
nature.
Acc0rding t0 the Criminal procedure code section 154 “Every inf0rmation relating t0 the
commissi0n of a c0gnizable offence, if given 0rally t0 an 0fficer in charge 0f a p0lice stati0n,
shall be reduced t0 writing by him 0r under his directi0n, and be read 0ver t0 the inf0rmant;
and every such inf0rmati0n, whether given in writing 0r reduced t0 writing as af0resaid,
shall be signed by the pers0n giving it, and the substance there0f shall be entered in a b00k
t0 be kept by such 0fficer in such f0rm as the State G0vernment may prescribe in this behalf”2

The Honourable Supreme court laid down in his judgement T.T.Antony vs. State of Kerala
& Ors3 laid down some important point regarding section 154 that “ Information given
under sub-section (1) of Section 154 of Cr.P.C., is commonly known as the First Information
Report (FIR), though this term is not used in the Code….And as it’s nick name suggests, it is
the earliest and the first information of a cognizable offence recorded by an 0fficer in charge
0f a p0lice station”4. The questions ar0se regardless 0f whether a specific data constitutes

a FIR relies upon the actualities and conditions of each case but whether the data can be
said t0 be a "First Inf0rmati0n Rep0rt" inside the significance of segment 154 of the code
0f CrPC. The FIR is a rep0rt gives certain info of the commission of the c0gnizable 0ffence

1
state of U.P vs. Krishna Mater & Ors, 2010 (2) L.S 42 (SC)
2
Sec. 154, The Code of Criminal Procedure
3
MANU/SC/0365/2001
4
T.T.Antony vs. State of Kerala & Ors. SC/0365/2001
which might be made by the dissensi0n 0r by the c0mplainant 0r by s0me 0ther individual
wh0 has kn0wledge ab0ut the c0mmissi0n 0f such 0ffense. It is pr0p0sed t0 set the
criminal law in m0vement. Any data identifying with the c0mmissi0n 0f a c0gnizable
0ffense is required t0 be lessened t0 c0mp0sing by the 0fficer resp0nsible f0r the p0lice
headquarters which must be marked by the individual giving it and the substance there0f
is required t0 be g0ne int0 the b00k t0 be kept by such 0fficer in such frame as the state
g0vernment may rec0mmend f0r that benefit. The enr0lment 0f the FIR enables the 0fficer
– in – charge 0f the p0lice headquarters t0 begin examinati0n regarding the wr0ngd0ing
answered t0 him. A duplicate 0f the FIR is required t0 be sent f0rthwith t0 the Magistrate
enabled t0 take percepti0n 0f such 0ffense.
The FIR is the initial step in the criminal cases that contain certain knowledge of the crime
committed where crime committed, and which time committed etc.
In this my project I choose a topic of Frist Information Report and reason behind the
choosing that project to choose various case law to understand how its procedural
changing with the time to time and how effective in the present time its position. I choose
case law that arose a question regarding the FIR and how supreme court and high court
satisfy these questions. So, I choose 3 case in this my survey of the cases project. Also,
Supreme court India pass order regarding the submission of the online FIR within the 24
hour, so police can “seek redressal of his grievances.”5

5
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/Publish-FIRs-online-within-24-hours-SC/article14626755.ece
 FACT QUESTION AND JUDGEMENT AROSE IN THE CASES

Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh6

Fact:-
in this the particular case writ petition was filed by the Lalita kumari through her father
f0r the issuance 0f a writ 0f Habeas C0rpus 0r bearings 0f like nature against the
resp0ndents thus f0r the assurance 0f his little girl wh0 has been kidnaped by the
kidnaper. A written rep0rt was submitted by the father 0f the Lalita 0n 11.05.2008 bef0re
the 0fficer in the charge in the p0lice stati0n and the p0lice n0t trusted 0n the what Lalita’s
father said and did n0t take any acti0n against the kidnaper. when the Superintendent 0f
P0lice was m0ved t0ward a FIR was enr0lled. In any case, n0 c0urse has been taken by the
p0lice experts to catch the denounced or recuperate the grabbed girl.

Question before the Court: -

Information received under the section 1547 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 of
cognizable 0ffence, is p0lice 0fficer is b0und t0 register FIR 0n the said information or the
police office should conduct a primary inquiry in test to correctness of the such
information before registering the FIR.

Ratio of the court: -

main 0bject 0f the p0int 0f view filing FIR is t0 set the criminal law pr0cedure in the m0ti0n.
Investigation authority should collect info about the criminal activity and able to take suitable
step to catch the wrongdoer. The reason of the section of 139 and 154 of Code of Criminal
Procedure, the registration of the FIR is mandatory in the nature where cognizable
offence occur there is no need for the preliminary veracity of the fact. Reading the section
154 with the 156 of crpc its become clear that the information regarding the cognizable
offence into the written form and put them as per law.

6
Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, (2014) 2 SCC 1
7
Supra 2
Sin qua non condition for the registering the FIR under the section 154 is that there must
be information and that information should disclose the cognizable offence. For the
cognizable offence a duty is bound to the police officer to register the FIR there no such a
need for the preliminary inquiry in the cognizable offence. There is certain exception
given in the section 157 in the code. The advancement in the registering compulsory FIR
is not only transparent in criminal justice but also protect the individual liberty. Section
154 of the Code is the strategy built up by law and in this way in congruity with Article
218 of the Constitution. Appropriately, the privilege of the accused under Article 21 for
the Constitution is ensured if the FIR is enrolled first and afterward the examination is
led as per the arrangements of the law.
While registering of the FIR is mandatory that not mean the as soon as complain is
registered and the accused person arrest, because in the law registering the FIR and
arrest of the person is totally different thing in the eye of law.

Decision Held: -
The following direction given by the court; -
1. Registrati0n 0f the FIR is mandat0ry as per the secti0n 154 0f the criminal
pr0cedure code of the 1973. There is no preliminary inquiry required for the
cognizable offence.
2. In the given information that the data got d0es n0t unveil a c0gnizable 0ffense but
rather sh0ws the need f0r an 0fficial inquiry, a primary inquiry might be led just
t0 disc0ver whether c0gnizable 0ffense is revealed 0r n0t.
3. In the case of the cognizable offence police officer cannot avoid his duty by not
registered FIR. Appropriate step can be taken against the failing officers who don't
enrol the FIR if the data got by him uncovers a cognizable offense.
4. There is no need for the revelling the total veracity of the truth but if the fact is
showing information of the cognizable offence its enough for the institute the FIR.
5. In the some of the cases there is preliminary inquiry is needed is:-
A. Corruption cases
B. Medical negligence cases
C. Family or matrimonial dispute

8
Constitution of India.
 D. Commercial offence
6. While ensuring the rights of the ensuring and shielding of the complaint and the
accused, a preliminary enquiry should be made within the time and this time
should not exceed more the seven days.

Youth Bar Association of India Vs Union of India and Others 9...

In this the case supreme court of the India issued a directive on the quick made the
report on the FIR to make easier for the accused as well the victim because in the case
supreme court given the very broad guideline that made concept of the FIR very
effective. “Supreme court made mandatory for the police to upload within the time
period of the 48-hour First Information Report (FIR) drawn up by it suo motu or on a
complaint”10. guideline was given by the famous supreme court judge Justices Dipak
Misra and C. Nagappan.

following Guidelines issued by the supreme court of the india11:-

1. accused have a right to get a copy of the First Information Report on the earlier stage
as per prescribed in the section of the 207 of the criminal procedure of code.
2. As per the second guideline said about the sensitive type of the crime like POSCO
act, sexual offence, terrorism offence, should be uploaded on the official website
of police, and in case if a state has a not such type of the website then that state
should upload on his the officially state website within the time period of the 24
hour of the registration of the first information report so that the accused and any
person should get the FIR and file a application before the court for the redressal
of his grievances. For the avoidances of the difficulty time can be extend to the 24
hours to 72 hours.
3. It he decision taken by the police not with transfer the copy of the first information
report on the website ought not a chance to be made Toward an officer beneath
the rank of deputy superintendent for Police or whatever representative holding
proportional post. Over case, those States the place region officer need a role, he
can assume that said to the authority. Further step taken by the district magistrate

9
2016 SCC OnLine SC 914
10
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/A-first-step-to-wholesome-reform/article14636569.ece.
11
http://www.livelaw.in/10-significant-guidelines-issued-supreme-court-fir/
 or police officer will be communicate the to the concerned jurisdictional
Magistrate.
4. Uploading of the FIR on the officially website of the all state shall be given the
effect from to the 15th November 2016.
5. In the some of the cases where they are in sensitive in the nature decision taken
that not to give the copy of the FIR, then it will be open to the relative of the
accused or the accused himself filed a new application before the court where the
FIR send, will be provide in the not more than the three days.
6. In between the clause the word a one word called ‘sensitive’ repeat and the mean
of the sensitive is to relate to the privacy that was mention in the FIR.

Anju Chaudhary vs State of U.P. & Anr

In this the case one most important question comes in effect that whether there can
be more than one FIR filled in the relation to the incidents arising from the same
occurrence?
Held: - while delivering the judgement supreme court judge said that the public
importance is the is the first. There is also not any the straight jacket formula in
relation to the filling the two FIR, it decides on the case to case or the answered on the
fact o each case. In the case of the of Mohan Baitha v. State of Bihar12 word ‘same
transaction’ come in the picture. Court said that its incapable to decide the exact
meaning of the word. So the several offence be part of the same transaction. The test
which must be connected is whether they are so identified with each other in purpose
of reason or of circumstances and end results, or as central and backup, to bring about
one nonstop action. So there ca be two FIR filled but its depend on the case to case.
“Thus, where there is a commonality of purpose or design, where there is a continuity of
action, then all those persons involved can be accused of the same or different offences
“committed in the course of the same transaction”13.

12
(2001) 4 SCC 350
13
Anju Chaudhary v. State of U.P., (2013) 6 SCC 384,
 CONCLUSION

In the view of the counter claim by the registration and non-registration of the FIR, the
information given to the police must disclose the offence of cognizable in the nature. In such a
scenario First Information Report is the mandatory. If the offence in the not relation to the
cognizable offence police need not be register immediate FIR. Police can conduct a primary
inquiry of the such offence. But if the offence in the cognizable in the nature police have no
choice but to register a FIR. If after the investigation if police found that the information id
the false than there is an option of the prosecute the for the filling false case of FIR. As per the
law FIR is the primary source that make the law in the motion, afterward law start the in the
motion. If police officer refuses the loading the FIR, the criminal justice system will become
fail. In the present scenario police cannot refuse the file a FIR even veracity of truth will be
checking in the certain cases like the medical negligence or etc. so the above discus case
judgement came out and make criminal justice system more effective. In the present scenario
FIR condition are much better than the earlier one. So, we can say that the whenever problem
regarding the filing of the FIR occur court goes in the root of the problem and trace them to
into and solve the problem. In the above mention all of the three-case court decide on their own
personal knowledge with the keep of the societies requirement in the mind. So finally, we can
say that the for the cognizable of the offence there Is no excuse for the police to refuse the
filing of the FIR. In case of the non-cognizable offence police can do some preliminary inquiry,
and later file a FIR.