FIR (First Information Report) may be lodged by an accused person himself. FIR
may be lodged by an accused person for two reasons: First, accused who has
committed horrendous murder would himself come to the Police Station and confess
Second, the accused may file a false FIR about the offence for
protecting his skin. A police officer must draw an FIR whenever it is brought to
his notice that a cognizable offence has been committed. The information that
can be used to draw the FIR can be provided by the accused. Upon receiving
information about the cognizable offence, Officer-in-Charge of the Police
Station is not allowed to refuse the registration of the case.
The accused might confess his involvement in the commission of a crime and thus
lodge the FIR. Accused after commission of crime might go to Police Station and
give detailed information as to what happened and what he did, then, based on
that information an FIR can be formulated. Because the information came from the
accused, it might have certain difficulties in proving it against him.
An accused would generally not file the FIR, as it is against his interest in
prosecution. However, FIR cannot be used as evidence against the accused when
the police officer has to record the information provided by the accused as FIR
(1974 Kerala L.T. 131). Any FIR which has a confession of the accused cannot be
admitted to as evidence either partly or fully. Confessionary FIR containing the
confession of guilt of the accused is inadmissible as evidence [1990 (2) Crimes
A statement contained in the FIR furnished by one of the accused in the case
cannot in any manner be used against another accused, it was held in the case of
Bandla Muddi Atchutha Ramaiah and others v. State of A.P.
A father said he saw the body of his son floating in the waters of the well. It
was FIR information. Further investigations revealed that the accused in his
son�s murder was his father. Section 21 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 stated
that the FIR could be admitted as an admission to the required extent and
applied against that extent alone (AIR 1964 SC 1850). The FIR becomes admissible
to the extent such prohibition is exempted under Section 27 of the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872 (AIR 1968 All 37, AIR 1966 SC 119)
Such FIR filed by the accused person does not come under Section 162 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
discusses the use of statements made to the police in the course of the
investigation. Under this section, testimonies given by witnesses to the police
during investigations shall not be admissible as evidence during the trial,
except where they can be used to contradict the witness� testimony in the trial.
Nonetheless, this provision does not extend to the FIR itself. FIR is the
exception to Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 since it
constitutes the substantive evidence in a criminal case which is admissible in
court and used for establishing the complaint, description of the offence and
identification of the persons involved.
Consequently, any statement made by the
accused in the FIR can be used as evidence in the trial as it is considered part
of the overall evidence. Nevertheless, it is imperative to assess the validity
and authenticity of these statements, as they are self-serving and will have to
be verified with other evidence.
Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with the admissibility of
confessions made to the police. It provides that any confession made to the
police officer, whether before or after an investigation should not be admitted
as evidence against a person charged with any offence.
Therefore, if one person
accuses another of violating the law and this individual confesses to a police
officer, that confession may not be admitted as evidence for the trial. This
provision was introduced to avoid coercion, undue influence, and wrong ways of
getting confessions from the accused by the police. Nevertheless, there is an
exception to this. Confessions made to a police officer can be used as evidence
in court if they are protected under Section 21 of the Indian Evidence Act,
This law governs the admissibility of confessions. Confession is relevant
under Section 21of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 in the presence of
circumstances making it voluntary and trustworthy. However, the court will
critically analyse the conditions which led to the confession so as to establish
whether the confession was voluntary and genuine.
When it comes to determining the admissibility of non-confessional information,
multiple sections of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 come into play. Section 18/21
deals with its admission against the accused. Meanwhile, Section 157 allows it
for the purpose of corroborating the maker's statement, and Section 145 permits
its use for refreshing the informer's memory.
In addition, Section 155 allows it
to be employed for impeaching the credit of an informer, while Section 8 can be
invoked to prove the informer's conduct. Section 32 (1) enables its utilization
as a Dying Declaration, while Section 6 comes in handy when injuries are
inflicted in the presence of the SHO/OC in a Police Station. Section 160 is
applicable when the informer can't recall the facts from memory but firmly
believes that they were accurately reported in the FIR when it was written and
The FIR is a government document prepared under section 154 CrPC and a certified
copy of it can be admitted in evidence under section 77 of the Indian Evidence
Act, 1872. The FIR by an accused cannot be taken as evidence against another
accused because it was lodged by an accused person and not by a witness.
However, if it is confirmed that an injured person had been shot and removed to
hospital, it is sufficient for registration of a case.
Is it clear, certain and
founded upon particular facts to show commission of a cognizable offence or
suspicion of commission of cognizable offence? This question has to be asked by
a police officer before registration of FIR. Every single case relies on its own
circumstances and the police officer should exercise his own judgment and due
diligence in checking the information.
When an accused willingly confesses to his involvement in a crime and initiates
the lodging of an FIR, a unique legal scenario unfolds. The voluntary nature of
the confession becomes a focal point, raising questions about its authenticity
and the accused's state of mind during the admission. Courts are cautious about
potential coercion, ensuring that the confession was made without undue
influence, fear, or pressure.
This voluntary admission, leading to the
formulation of an FIR, introduces complexities in the subsequent legal
proceedings, necessitating a thorough examination of the confession's validity
and the circumstances surrounding its disclosure.
The difficulty in proving a confession originating from the accused lies in the
inherent potential for self-incrimination and the need for corroborative
For legal system, additional evidence is necessary in most cases except where
there is a full confession by the accused persons themselves. Voluntariness of
admission, understanding of rights and possible falseness of confession create
further problems regarding the evidence. It is extremely important that courts
make proper judgments that safeguard any person�s rights against
self-incrimination and ensure fair trials; they must be meticulous in evaluating
the validity of each confession so as to avoid any kind of miscarriage of
Written By: Md.Imran Wahab
- FIR, Arrest & Bail, Madabhushi Sridhar, Asia Law House, Hyderabad
- First Information Report, Mangari Rajender, Asia Law House, Hyderabad
, IPS, IGP, Provisioning, West Bengal
Email: [email protected]
, Ph no: 9836576565