CrPC Assignment

Sub: Evidentiary value of a First Information Report

Submitted By,
Jash C James
Roll No. 39
5/5th B.B.A, LL.B

1
 Table of Contents

Contents

Table of Contents .................................................................................2

Introduction ..........................................................................................3

Evidentiary value of FIR ......................................................................4

What is an FIR ...................................................................................4

Evidentiary Value ..............................................................................5

Confessional Statement .....................................................................9

Dying Declaration ...........................................................................10

Conclusion .........................................................................................12

Bibliography.......................................................................................13

2
 Introduction

First Information Report (FIR) is a written document which is

prepared when the police first receive information about the

commission of a crime. It contains the details of the informant, the

details of the crime, and the date and time it was committed according

to the informant.

The basic purpose of filing a FIR is to set criminal law into motion

and not to state all the minute details therein. A First Information

Report is the initial step in a criminal case recorded by the police and

contains the basic knowledge of the crime committed, place of

commission, time of commission, who was the victim, etc. The

evidentiary value of FIR will be discussed in this paper.

3
 Evidentiary value of FIR

What is a FIR

An FIR is the first step towards any sort of criminal activity. It triggers

the criminal justice machinery of the State into motion. If you want to

report a crime and initiate criminal proceedings by the police, the first

step is to file an FIR.

The definition for the First Information Report has been provided in the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the virtue of Sec. 154, which lays

as:

“Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable

offence, if given orally to an officer in charge of a police station,

shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be

read Over to the informant; and every such information, whether

given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be

signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be

4
 entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the

State Government may prescribe in this behalf”.

In Dilawar Singh v. State Of Delhi, the Court held that:

“After all registration of FIR involves only the process of entering

the substance of the information relating to the Commission of a

cognizable offence in a book kept by the officer in charge…as

indicated in Sec. 154 of the Code”.

Evidentiary Value

The police can make three different kinds of statements. The first

kind of statement is one which can be recorded as an FIR, the second

kind of statement is one which can be recorded by the police during the

investigation, and third kind of statement is any kind of statement

which would not fall under any of the two categories mentioned above.

None of the above statements can be considered as substantive

evidence, that is to say, as evidence of facts stated therein. Because it

is not made during trial, it is not given on oath, nor is it tested by cross-

examination. If the person making any such statement to the police

5
subsequently appears and gives evidence in court at the time of trial,

his former statement could , however be used to corroborate or to

contradict his testimony according to the provisions of the Evidence

Act, 1872.

Section 145 of the Evidence Act provides that:

“A witness may be crossed-examined as to previous statements

made by him in writing or reduced into 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 writing can be proved, be called to

those parts of it which are to be used for the purpose of

contradicting him.”

Furthermore, it may be noted that if any statement made to a police

amounts to a confession, such a confession cannot be proved against a

person accused of any offence.

The FIR is not substantive evidence, but it can be used to corroborate

the informant under Section 157 of the Evidence Act, or to contradict

him under Section 145 of the Act, if the informant is called as a witness

at the time of trial. Obviously, the FIR cannot be used for the purposes
6
of corroborating or contradicting any witness other than the one lodging

the FIR.

The accused can utilize the FIR to make the person lodging the FIR

look less credible and therefore make the value of the FIR as a piece of

evidence goes down. However this is only applicable to the informant

and not to any other person. Even if the informant is contradicted and

the FIR loses some credibility the other witness are enough for

conviction of the accused, that is, the value of the FIR is not that

substantial.

It may happen that the informant is the accused himself. In such cases,

the first information lodged by him cannot be used as an evidence

against him because it is embodied in the basic structure of our

constitution that a person cannot be compelled to be a witness against

himself.

In a number of cases, it has been held by the Court the only possible

action that can be taken on the basis of FIR is to either corroborate or

contradict the statements given by such informant as per the provisions

of the Evidence Act. The court went on to hold that if the maker is also

the accused even this is not possible.

7
Apex Court has held that:

“The contents of the FIR can only be used for contradiction and

corroboration of the maker and not any other eye witness”.

It was held in Pandurang Chandrakant Mhatre v. State of Maharashtra,

that it is fairly well settled that first information report is not a

substantive piece of evidence and it can be used only to discredit the

testimony of the maker thereof and it cannot be utilized for

contradicting or discrediting the testimony of other witnesses.

Although first information report is not expected to be encyclopedia of

events, but an information to the police to be “first information report”

under Section 154(1) must contain some essential and relevant details

of the incident. A cryptic information about commission of a

cognizable offence irrespective of the nature and details of such

information may not be treated as an FIR. An FIR recorded without any

loss of time is likely to be free from embroideries, exaggerations and

without anybody intermeddling with it and polluting and adulterating

the same with lies. The purpose of, FIR is to obtain the earliest account

of a cognizable offence, before there is an opportunity for the

circumstances to be forgotten and embellished. It is well settled that

FIR is not a substantive piece of evidence and can be used to

corroborate or contradict the statement of the maker thereof. It is also

8
equally established that trustworthiness of the prosecution story can

also be judged from the FIR. Besides first information report is relevant

as it may be a part of the res gestae.

Confessional Statement

Where a person named in the FIR is to be summoned, the FIR can be

taken into consideration if the charge sheet has not been prepared as it

is a very important evidence at that stage. Further, if the FIR is a

confessional one, it can be admissible. A confession is received in

evidence on the presumption that no person will voluntarily make a

statement which is against his or her interest, unless it be true. In case

of a confession by the accused, the Court must look into two tests, i.e.

(a) whether the confession is perfectly voluntary, and (b) if so, whether

it is true and trustworthy. Satisfaction of the first test is s sine qua non

for its admissibility in evidence and if the circumstances of the case

throw any doubt on its voluntary nature the confession must always be

rejected. If the confession is shown to be made in consequence of

inducement, threat or promise, it is inadmissible in evidence as it will

lack the important element of voluntary action on the part of accused

and may be a result of undue influence, coercion, threat, blackmailing

etc.

9
As for the second test, the Court must examine the evidence available,

the contents of the statement so made and then apply to them the test

of probability. If the court finds that the material statement in the

confession is inconsistent with the evidence of eye witness, it must be

held that the prosecution has failed to prove that the confession is true

and it must be put aside.

Dying Declaration

In certain cases, the first information report can be used u/s 32(1) of the

Indian Evidence Act, 1872 or under Sec. 8 of the Act as to the cause of

the informant’s death or as a part of the informant’s conduct. If the

informant deceases, the first information report can be unquestionably

used as a substantive evidence.

In the case of K.R Reddy vs. Public Prosecutor the evidentiary value of

dying declaration was observed as,

“The dying declaration is admissible under Section 32 & because

the statement not made on oath so that its truth could be tested by

cross-examination, the court has to observe the closest inspection

of the statement before acting upon it. And it is also assumed that

the words of a dying man are of a very serious nature because a

person on the verge of death is not likely to tell lies or to connect

10
 a case to a malice prosecution of an innocent person. Once the

court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true & voluntary and

are not influenced, then the statements can be sufficient to prove

the conviction even without further corroboration.”

A pre-requisite condition must be fulfilled before F.I.R. is taken as a

substantive piece of evidence, i.e... The death of the informant must

have nexus with the F.I.R. filed or somehow having some link with any

evidence regarding the F.I.R. this is a derivation of Sec. 32 of the Indian

Evidence Act, 1872, by the Court in the matter of Damodar Prasad vs.

State of U.P. This view was earlier displayed by Court in the case of

Kapoor Singh vs. Emperor. The courts of this land have also said that

an FIR can be a dying declaration if the informant dies of his injuries

after lodging the same. However, when the FIR clearly implicates the

person who is the accused and contains the details of the incident this

is not considered to be a dying declaration. The essential element of

certainty must be fulfilled and there must be no doubt left that it might

be a disappearance.

11
 Conclusion

First Information Report is not an encyclopedia but a procedure

followed to set the law in motion. It is important to report if duly

recorded and have evidentiary value. It is a very important factor to

record such a report in any circumstances of the commission of an

offence. It is a report of evidential value in the trail for corroborating

evidence and contradicting witnesses. Sometimes it is considered a

Substantial piece of evidence but it sometimes ends up with an

importance piece of evidence. There are certain exceptions to this

evidentiary value of FIR. It can be said that the evidential value of FIR

can be depended upon circumstances of cases, where it can use a

substantive piece of evidence or can be used to corroborate evidence or

contradict the witnesses. Thus we can assume that it is a vital

circumstantial piece of evidence as it is the first report of information

of commission of the offence.

12
 Bibliography

• blog.ipleaders.in

• www.lawyersclubindia.com

• www.legalserviceindia.com

• www.ourlaw.in

• shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in

• www.iosrjournals.org

13