Introduction:- Every person, who is aware of the commission of an offence or of the intention of any other person to commit an offence, has a duty to inform the same to the nearest Magistrate or Police Officer. Than the Police Officer records the report and it is called "First Information Report".
The expression "First Information Report" demotes something in the nature of accusation or allegation as to commission of an offence with a view to put the Police in motion. It is an information relating to commission of a cognizable offence given to police orally or in writing, in order to put the Police in motion to investigate the matter. If the report is oral,it is to be reduced in writing.
The expression "First Information Report" demotes something in the nature of accusation or allegation as to commission of an offence with a view to put the Police in motion. It is an information relating to commission of a cognizable offence given to police orally or in writing, in order to put the Police in motion to investigate the matter. If the report is oral,it is to be reduced in writing.
F.I.R UNDER Cr.P.C:- Sec.154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with the first information report. It provides that every information relating to the commission is a cognizable offence, if given orally to the police officer-in-charge of a police station must be reduced in writing by him and read over to the informant. The information should also be signed by the person giving it and the substance thereof must be entered in the book which is to be kept by such officer in the prescribed form. A copy of the information recorded as said above is also to be kept by such officer in the prescribed form. A copy of the information recorded as said above is also to be given free of cost to the informant.
No where in the Criminal Procedure Code the term F.I.R. has defined, but F.I.R. is that information which is given to the police first in point of time. It must be noted that the information must be of such that investigation could be started on it.
No where in the Criminal Procedure Code the term F.I.R. has defined, but F.I.R. is that information which is given to the police first in point of time. It must be noted that the information must be of such that investigation could be started on it.
Ingredients of First Information Report:-
1. It is the information which is
given to the police officer.
2. Information must relates to
a cognizable offence.
3. It is the information first in
point of time.
4. It is on the basis of this
information the
investigation into the
offence commences.
In was held in the case of State of U.P. vs. Mukesh that F.I.R. is intimation abut the occurrence of the accident.
In the case of Dasan vs. State of Kerala (1987), it was held that an anonymous telephone message which didn't clearly specify a cognizable offence can't be treated as F.I.R.
In Golla Jalla Reddy vs. State of A.P., 1996 Cr.L.J.2470S.C., it has been held that where oral complaint disclosing commission of a cognizable offence has been made and police investigation started on its basis, and later on a second report is made in writing, the written report has to be considered as statement under sec.161 of the Code and not as F.I.R. and it can't be used for corroboration of evidence of information.
In the case of K.C. Mangal vs. State of Rajasthan ,1983Cr.L.J ,S.C., the Supreme Court has opined that the non mention of name of the accused in the F.I.R. doesn't invalidate the F.I.R. When the F.I.R. describe the accused as a factory inspector, the absence of name is of no significance.
given to the police officer.
2. Information must relates to
a cognizable offence.
3. It is the information first in
point of time.
4. It is on the basis of this
information the
investigation into the
offence commences.
In was held in the case of State of U.P. vs. Mukesh that F.I.R. is intimation abut the occurrence of the accident.
In the case of Dasan vs. State of Kerala (1987), it was held that an anonymous telephone message which didn't clearly specify a cognizable offence can't be treated as F.I.R.
In Golla Jalla Reddy vs. State of A.P., 1996 Cr.L.J.2470S.C., it has been held that where oral complaint disclosing commission of a cognizable offence has been made and police investigation started on its basis, and later on a second report is made in writing, the written report has to be considered as statement under sec.161 of the Code and not as F.I.R. and it can't be used for corroboration of evidence of information.
In the case of K.C. Mangal vs. State of Rajasthan ,1983Cr.L.J ,S.C., the Supreme Court has opined that the non mention of name of the accused in the F.I.R. doesn't invalidate the F.I.R. When the F.I.R. describe the accused as a factory inspector, the absence of name is of no significance.
Another important fact is to be noted regarding F.I.R. is that if one case relates to two or more offences of which at least one is cognizable, the case is deemed to be a cognizable case despite from the fact that the other offence is non-cognizable.
Evidentiary value of F.I.R:
F.I.R.is not a pice of substantive evidence and can be used only for limited purposes, like corroboration or contradicting the matter thereof, or to show that the implication of the accused was not an afterthought. As the object of F.I.R. is to obtain the earliest information of an offence and ti record the circumstances before there is time for them to be forgotten, it can be used for the purpose of testing the truth of the truth of the prosecution story. Therefore the value of F.I.R. will vary case to case, depending on whether it is based on information given by the complaint or eye witness to the crime or a mere stranger.
Punishment:- Sections 182,203&211 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the provision relating to the punishment for giving false information to the police .Even if such information is not reduced to writing under Sec. 154, the person giving the false information may nevertheless be punished for preferring a false charge u/s 211 of I.P.C. 1860.
A police officer refusing to enter in the diary a report made to him about the commission of an offence and instead making an entry which is totally different from the information given would be guilty under Sec.177 of I.P.C.
F.I.R.is not a pice of substantive evidence and can be used only for limited purposes, like corroboration or contradicting the matter thereof, or to show that the implication of the accused was not an afterthought. As the object of F.I.R. is to obtain the earliest information of an offence and ti record the circumstances before there is time for them to be forgotten, it can be used for the purpose of testing the truth of the truth of the prosecution story. Therefore the value of F.I.R. will vary case to case, depending on whether it is based on information given by the complaint or eye witness to the crime or a mere stranger.
Punishment:- Sections 182,203&211 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the provision relating to the punishment for giving false information to the police .Even if such information is not reduced to writing under Sec. 154, the person giving the false information may nevertheless be punished for preferring a false charge u/s 211 of I.P.C. 1860.
A police officer refusing to enter in the diary a report made to him about the commission of an offence and instead making an entry which is totally different from the information given would be guilty under Sec.177 of I.P.C.
Complaint:- Section 2(D) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, defines complaint as "complaint" means any allegation made orally or in writing to a magistrate with a view to his taking action under the Code, that some person, whether known or unknown has committed an offence, but doesn't include a police report.
Just as plaint is filed in a civil court, complaint is lodged to initiate the Criminal proceeding against the accused.
Distinction between F.I.R. and Complaint:-
a. Complaint is defined under section 2(d) of the Code.
Whereas F.I.R. is not defined under the Code.
b. Complaint is an allegation made orally or in writing made to a Magistrate as to the commission of an offence.
Whereas F.I.R. is an information given to a police officer as to the commission of an offence.
c. The person lodging the complaint (complainant) must take oath.
Whereas the person giving F.I.R. (informant) need not to take oath.
d. In case of complaint the complainant is liable for prosecution in the event, the complaint is found false.
Whereas in case of F.I.R. the informant is not liable fir prosecution if the information given by him is fund false.
e. Complaint itself a substantial evidence.
Whereas F.I.R. is not a substantial evidence.
f. Complaint refers to both cognizable and non-cognizable offences.
Whereas F.I.R. refers only to cognizable offences.
Just as plaint is filed in a civil court, complaint is lodged to initiate the Criminal proceeding against the accused.
Distinction between F.I.R. and Complaint:-
a. Complaint is defined under section 2(d) of the Code.
Whereas F.I.R. is not defined under the Code.
b. Complaint is an allegation made orally or in writing made to a Magistrate as to the commission of an offence.
Whereas F.I.R. is an information given to a police officer as to the commission of an offence.
c. The person lodging the complaint (complainant) must take oath.
Whereas the person giving F.I.R. (informant) need not to take oath.
d. In case of complaint the complainant is liable for prosecution in the event, the complaint is found false.
Whereas in case of F.I.R. the informant is not liable fir prosecution if the information given by him is fund false.
e. Complaint itself a substantial evidence.
Whereas F.I.R. is not a substantial evidence.
f. Complaint refers to both cognizable and non-cognizable offences.
Whereas F.I.R. refers only to cognizable offences.
Conclusion:- After the exhilarating discussion of the F.I.R. enshrined in under sec.154 and Complaint under sec. 2(d) of Criminal Procedure Code at conclusion we can say that F.I.R. is an information given to the police officer as to commission of a cognizable offence whereas complaint is an information given to the Magistrate about the commission of a cognizable or non-cognizable offence.
No comments:
Post a Comment