FIR prima facie disclosing commission of alleged offences against accused
persons can be quashed in part by HC going in to minutes' details of the case.
Filing of second FIR against same accused and in respect of same incident as
mentioned in FIR is permissible, when second FIR filed as counter complaint by
different person based on different allegations. Absence of name of accused
persons in FIR can't be ground to raise doubts about prosecution case.
The word "shall" used in section 154 leaves no discretion in police officer to
hold preliminary Enquiry before recording FIR. Use of expression " information"
without any qualification also denotes that the police has to record information
despite it being satisfied by its reasonableness or credibility.
FIR u/s 154 of the Code is not a substantive piece of evidence. It is only used
to contradict or corroborate the matter there of.
In order for a message or communication to be qualified to be a FIR, there must
be something in the Nature of a complaint or accusation or at least some
information of the crime'given with the object of setting the police or criminal
Law in motion. It is true that a FIR need not contain the minutes of Details as
to how the offence had taken place nor it is required to contain the names of
the offenders or witnesses.
But it must at least contains some information about the crime committed as also
some information about the manner in which the cognizable offence has been
committed. A cryptic message recording an occurrence can not be termed as FIR.
A mere information received on phone by a police officer without any details as
regards the identity of the accused or the Nature of injuries caused by the
victims as well as the name of the culprits may not be treated as FIR.
Mete delay in lodging the FIR is not necessarily fatal to the case of the
prosecution. However, the facts that the report was lodged belatedly is a
of which the Court must take notice.
The answer to the question whether the FIR in a given case has been lodged
belatedly or not is always a question of fact and has to be answered bearing in
mind the facts of the casein questions and also the explanation furnished by the
prosecution in the case, there is some delay in its being lodged.
There can be no mathematical computation of the time taken in the lodging of the
FIR,what the Court has to examine is whether the delay is inordinate and whether
any cognent explanation is forthcoming in case it is so ,some delay in the
lodging of the FIR is only natural and would not detract from the value to be
attached to it. A little delay is some times bound to be there.