Legal Reference Library

High Court of Tripura Kalpana Majumder and Ors. v. Sankar Debnath and Ors. MANU/TR/0077/2017 08.05.2017 Motor Vehicles FIR is not a substantive piece of evidence; it can be used only for purposes of corroboration or contradiction of maker only Aggrieved by nil award passed by learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, present appeal is preferred by appellant-claimants. Appellant claimed that, accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of driver of said Mahindra Maxx. Police registered a case under Sections 279 and 304-A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) against driver of offending vehicle. Appellants, therefore, filed claim petition claiming a compensation of Rs. 26,44,000/- for death of deceased. Deceased was stated to be a fisherman at time of accident and was earning Rs. 9,000/- per month as an income. He was also stated to be 50 years of age, when he met the accident. Claim petition was opposed by owner of vehicle, who is Respondent No. 1 herein, by filin...

The Supreme Court, in a brief order, has observed that an FIR can be quashed in part against some accused against whom no cognizable offence is made out. The apex court bench comprising Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose and Justice RF Nariman, in Lovely Salhotra vs State, set aside a Delhi High Court order and observed that the court could not refuse to quash FIR only on the ground that the investigation against co-accused is still pending. The petitioners before the high court had sought to quash the complaint on the ground that on a reading of the FIR, no offence was made out against the petitioners. Refusing to quash the case, the Delhi High Court had observed: “It cannot be said that on a reading of the FIR, prima facie, no cognizable offence is made out against the petitioners. Even otherwise, the FIR cannot be quashed at this stage of investigation and that too in part, since there are other accused including accused no.1 Madhvi Khurana against whom the case is under investigati...

The Supreme Court, in Fazar Ali vs State of Assam, has held that there is no inconsistency in chargesheeting and convicting persons who have not been named along with the other accused in the First Information Report. In a criminal appeal before the apex court, one of the contentions put forth on behalf of convicts was that since the names of seven other accused were not disclosed in the FIR, they could not have been chargesheeted. A bench comprising Justice AK Sikri and Justice Ashok Bhushan observed that the FIR clearly mentioned that 12 persons were accused and the FIR, from the very beginning, claimed that apart from five names mentioned, seven others were also accused.

The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court in the matter of Shri. Abhay Shantilal Jain, vs The State of Maharashtra, through Police Station, Jamner Tal. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon, has held that re-payment of loan amount will not have any adverse effect on a criminal prosecution. The bench of Justice SS Shinde and Justice KK Sonawane was hearing an application filed under Section 482 of CrPC seeking quashing of an FIR registered against members of a cooperative credit society. Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/mere-repayment-money-cant-ground-quashing-cheating-case-bombay-hc/

In Satish Dharmu Rathod v. The State of Maharashtra, the complainant in her FIR lodged at the Cantonment Police Station on 9.10.2015 had alleged that while cohabitation at matrimonial home, she was subjected to maltreatment and harassment by the applicant on account of demand of money as well as domestic cause. Pursuant to the FIR, setting the criminal law in motion and the IO proceeded to record the statement of witnesses acquainted with the facts of the case. Meanwhile, the applicants approached the High Court praying to quash and set aside the impugned FIR, filed by the complainant contending that the Cantonment Police Station, Aurangabad had no territorial jurisdiction to investigate into the crime as no part of crime was shown committed within its territorial limits  as the alleged offences were shown to be committed at Kandhar and Mumbai. The Court found no force in the argument stating that the FIR deserved to be quashed on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdic...

In Kishin S. Loungani Vs. Union Of India, the main question to be decided by the Kerala HC was  whether the provisions of Sections 154 to 157 and 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure would apply in respect of the proceedings under the Customs Act, in view of Section 4(2) of the Cr.P.C. and whether in respect of offences under Sections 133 to 135 of the Customs Act registration of FIR is compulsory before the person concerned is arrested and produced before the Magistrate. It was held that Registration of FIR is not necessary before arresting a person under Section 104 of the Customs Act. Sections 154 to 157 and Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure do not apply to a case under the Customs Act, 1962. Article referred: http://taxguru.in/custom-duty/registration-fir-not-necessary-before-arresting-person-us-104-customs-act.html#sthash.LwoWw6bm.dpuf

The Supreme Court in Anjan Dasgupta vs. The State of West Bengal, has held that the receipt and recording of First Information Report is not a condition precedent for setting in motion a criminal investigation and the police are duty bound to start investigation when it gets information with regard to commission of crime. A trial court had acquitted an accused observing that the FIR was ante-timed as the prosecution witness, who gave the written complaint for lodging an FIR, deposed that that he went to the police station after 7.30 pm. The court observed that the FIR could not have been lodged before 7.30­8 pm and the mention of time of receiving the information in the FIR as 17.35 hours clearly proves that it was ante-timed. Agreeing with reversal of acquittal by the high court, the apex court bench comprising Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose and Justice Ashok Bhushan observed that the information of murder was received before 17.35 hours at the police station, which is fully proved ...

In Sankara Narayanan, President and Chief Operating Officer, Asianet Satellite Communications Limited Vs. Subbiah IAS, the Hon'ble Kerala High Court on deciding whether Final Report filed by the Investigation Officer can be substituted by another Final Report under Section 173 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 held that court below wanted to get the Final Report substituted by another Final Report, which course is not contemplated under any of the provisions contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure. This is a case wherein the Final Report was not returned for curing defects, or for proper presentation. The court below “remitted the final report” which is unknown to legal procedure.

Directing the State police to “learn a lesson” from the reported murder of a 24-year-old woman from Tirunelveli due to non registration of a complaint of abduction lodged by her father in September last, the Madras High Court Bench here on Thursday stressed the need for registering First Information Reports (FIR) irrespective of territorial jurisdiction. A Division Bench of Justices S. Nagamuthu and M.V. Muralidaran passed the order on a habeas corpus petition filed by C. Gnanaiah (50) of Sankarankoil Taluk in Tirunelveli district on August 10 this year seeking a direction to Tirunelveli police to save his daughter G. Anbu Stella, a lab technician, from the clutches of a Pastor Millan (50) of Tharuvai in Tirunelveli district. Enquiries made by the judges with R. Thirugnanam, Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli city, and V. Vikraman, Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli, revealed that the petitioner had lodged a complaint with the office of Tirunelveli Deputy Inspector General of P...

In a significant judgment, the Madras High Court has ruled that litigants can no longer approach the High Court directly if police refuse to act upon their complaints, before exploiting the other available remedies, including moving the jurisdictional judicial magistrate. Justice P.N. Prakash passed directions to this effect on Tuesday while dismissing a batch of criminal original petitions seeking direction to the police to register FIR on their complaints. However, the judge made it clear that the doors of the High Court will not be completely shut. “This court will entertain applications seeking to register an FIR when the police fail to follow the timetable (within six weeks) to take action on a complaint set by the Supreme Court,” the judge said. The issue whether litigants can directly approach the High Court under Section 482 (Inherent powers of the high court) of the Cr.P.C. seeking relief either to file an FIR or to quash one without exhausting the alternative remedies a...

The Supreme Court of India Today in Youth Bar Association of India Vs Union of India and Others has issued 10 important Guidelines on First Information Report. The Bench comprising of Justices Dipak Misra and C.Nagappan has issued the following Guidelines (a) An accused is entitled to get a copy of the First Information Report at an earlier stage than as prescribed under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. (b) An accused who has reasons to suspect that he has been roped in a criminal case and his name may be finding place in a First Information Report can submit an application through his representative/agent/parokar for grant of a certified copy before the concerned police officer or to the Superintendent of Police on payment of such fee which is payable for obtaining such a copy from the Court. On such application being made, the copy shall be supplied within twenty-four hours. (c) Once the First Information Report is forwarded by the police station to the concerned Magistrate or any Spec...

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 154 — Delay in lodging/filing FIR — Explanation by prosecution for — Need of: Delay in setting law into motion by lodging of complaint and registration of FIR is normally viewed by courts with suspicion because there is possibility of concoction and embellishment of the occurrence. So it becomes necessary for prosecution to satisfactorily explain the delay. Object of insisting upon a prompt lodging of report, is to obtain early information not only regarding assailants but also about part played by accused, nature of incident and names of witnesses. [Gajanan Dashrath Kharate v. State of Maharashtra, (2016) 4 SCC 604]

Calcutta High Court has directed Judicial Magistrates of the State to ensure that order for investigation U/S 156(3) CrPC reaches concerned Police stations forthwith, without delay, to avoid inordinate in starting police investigation. Justices Sankar Acharyya and Aniruddha Bose made this observation while dismissing acriminal appeal filed by a person convicted for rape. The bench observed “At the very outset we feel it necessary for administration of criminal justice system in the State and to prevent abuse of process of Courts by exercise of our power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the CrPC. to point out an irregularity which is apparent in this case. It comes to our notice that the petition of complaint was lodged by PW 1 in Court on 4.11.2006 which was forwarded to O.C. of police station for treating it as FIR under Section (3), CrPC. but it was received at police station on 11.12.2006 which is after one month and one week of lodging the com...

An interesting question came up before the Supreme Court in  Anju Chaudhary Vs. State of U.P.  whether there can be more than one FIR in relation to the same incident or different incidents arising from the same occurrence? While answering the aforesaid question, the Bench held as under; 2. A cardinal question of public importance and one that is likely to arise more often than not in relation to the lodging of the First Information Report (FIR) with the aid of Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, ‘the Code’) or otherwise independently within the ambit of Section 154 of the Code is as to whether there can be more than one FIR in relation to the same incident or different incidents arising from the same occurrence.  ...  9. In the present appeal by way of special leave, the appellant Smt. Anju Chaudhary challenges the legality and correctness of the order of the High Court primarily on the following grounds :  (a) The...