First Information Report (FIR)

Introduction

A First Information Report (FIR) is the initial information recorded by the police about the commission of a cognizable offence. It enables the police to begin an investigation in accordance with law and helps preserve information about the alleged offence.

The FIR is an important part of criminal procedure in India. Its legal basis was Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), and the corresponding provision under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), is Section 173.

Meaning and Definition of FIR

The term "First Information Report" was not expressly defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. In general, an FIR is the first information recorded by the police regarding the commission of a cognizable offence.

A cognizable offence is an offence for which the police may arrest a person without a warrant and investigate according to law, subject to the applicable statutory requirements.

The FIR provides the starting point for a police investigation. It need not contain every detail of the alleged offence or identify the accused by name. It must, however, disclose information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence.

Object of an FIR

The main objectives of an FIR are:

• To set the criminal law in motion.
• To enable the police to begin investigating a cognizable offence.
• To help the police collect evidence promptly.
• To record the initial information about the alleged offence.
• To reduce the risk of important facts being forgotten or changed over time.

An FIR is not proof that the accused committed the offence. It records the initial information that may lead to an investigation and subsequent criminal proceedings.

Essential Conditions of an FIR

The essential conditions of an FIR, as discussed in the case law referred to in the source material, are:

• It must contain information: The report must communicate information about an alleged criminal offence.
• It must be recorded in writing: Oral information given to the police must be reduced to writing in accordance with the applicable procedure.
• It must relate to a cognizable offence: The information must disclose the commission of a cognizable offence, rather than merely describe a later or unrelated event.
• It must initiate criminal action: The information must be of a nature that calls for the criminal law to be set in motion.

The information need not contain a complete account of the incident. Its essential purpose is to disclose information about the commission of a cognizable offence.

Procedure for Recording an FIR

Information Given Orally

Under Section 154 of the CrPC, when information about a cognizable offence was given orally to the officer in charge of a police station:

• The officer had to reduce the information to writing.
• The information had to be read over to the person giving it.
• The informant had to sign the written statement.
• The information had to be entered in the prescribed book or record.
• A copy of the recorded information had to be provided to the informant free of cost.

The corresponding procedure under the BNSS must be followed for cases governed by the current law.

Information Given in Writing

When the informant submitted information in writing, it had to be dealt with according to the statutory requirements for recording information about a cognizable offence.

The fact that information is submitted in writing does not remove the need to follow the applicable legal procedure for registering and recording an FIR.

Refusal to Record an FIR

Under Section 154(3) of the CrPC, if the officer in charge of a police station refused to record information about a cognizable offence, the aggrieved person could send the substance of that information in writing to the Superintendent of Police.

If satisfied that the information disclosed a cognizable offence, the Superintendent of Police could investigate the case personally or direct a subordinate police officer to investigate it. The officer assigned to investigate would have the powers provided by law.

For cases governed by the BNSS, the corresponding statutory procedure should be consulted.

Information Given by Women in Specified Cases

The earlier Section 154 of the CrPC provided special safeguards for recording information from a woman against whom certain specified offences, including specified sexual offences, were alleged to have been committed or attempted.

In such cases, the information was to be recorded by a woman police officer or another woman officer in accordance with the statutory requirements. The applicable provisions of the BNSS govern cases under the current law.

Information That May Be Recorded as an FIR

Information may qualify as an FIR when it discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. It is not necessary for the information to:

• State every detail of the incident.
• Identify the accused by name.
• Provide a complete account of all the evidence.
• Establish the guilt of the accused at the time of reporting.

The essential requirement is that the information must disclose the commission of a cognizable offence and satisfy the applicable legal requirements.

Information That May Not Qualify as an FIR

The source material identifies the following situations in which information may not be treated as an FIR:

• Information received after an investigation has begun: A later statement or piece of information recorded during an existing investigation is not automatically the FIR for that case.
• Certain telephone messages: A vague or incomplete telephone message may not qualify as an FIR. Whether a telephone communication qualifies depends on its content, the identity of the informant, and the circumstances in which it is received and recorded.
• Information about a mere gathering of persons: Information that only reports an assembly, without disclosing a cognizable offence, may not qualify as an FIR.
• Vague or indefinite information: Information that does not disclose the commission of a cognizable offence may not satisfy the legal requirements for an FIR.

These situations must be assessed in their context. The fact that information is received by telephone or through another communication method does not, by itself, determine whether it qualifies as an FIR.

Important Case Law

Moni Mohan v. Emperor (AIR 1931 Cal)

The case is cited in the source material for the essential conditions of an FIR. The principles identified are that the information must relate to a cognizable offence, be recorded in writing, and be intended to set the criminal law in motion.

The case is relevant to understanding the basic nature and purpose of an FIR under the earlier criminal procedure framework.

Evidentiary Value of an FIR

An FIR is generally not substantive evidence. This means that the statements recorded in it cannot, by themselves, be treated as proof that the facts stated are true.

However, an FIR may be used for certain purposes during a criminal trial, subject to the applicable rules of evidence.

Corroborating the Informant

Corroboration means supporting or confirming a witness's testimony. An FIR may be used to support the testimony of the person who lodged it when that person appears as a witness in court.

Under Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, an earlier statement could be used to corroborate the testimony of its maker, subject to the statutory conditions.

Contradicting the Informant

An FIR may be used to contradict its maker when the informant gives evidence in court and the earlier statement differs from that evidence.

Under Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the relevant parts of the earlier written statement must be brought to the witness's attention in accordance with the law.

Impeaching the Credibility of the Informant

Impeaching credibility means challenging whether a witness should be believed. Under Section 155(3) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a previous inconsistent statement could be used to challenge the credibility of its maker, subject to the applicable rules.

FIR Lodged by the Accused

If the accused lodges the FIR, it cannot ordinarily be used to corroborate or contradict the accused as a prosecution witness merely because the accused made the report. The evidentiary use of the statement depends on the accused's role in the proceedings and the applicable rules of evidence.

A non-confessional statement made by the accused may, in appropriate circumstances, be relevant as an admission. However, statements made to police officers are subject to specific legal restrictions, and an FIR cannot automatically be used as an admission against the accused in every case.

FIR as a Dying Declaration

A dying declaration is a statement relating to the cause of a person's death or the circumstances of the transaction that resulted in the death, where the legal requirements are satisfied.

If the informant dies and the FIR relates to the cause of that person's death or the circumstances resulting in it, the FIR may be admissible as a dying declaration under the applicable law of evidence. Its admissibility and evidentiary weight depend on the circumstances of the case.

Applicable Law of Evidence

The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, has been replaced by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, with effect from 1 July 2024, subject to applicable transitional provisions. References to Sections 145, 155, and 157 of the earlier Act are relevant when studying the historical framework. Cases governed by the current law must be examined under the applicable provisions of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam.

Delay in Filing an FIR

An FIR should ordinarily be lodged promptly after a cognizable offence is reported. Early reporting helps preserve the accuracy of the initial account and enables the police to investigate while the information is still fresh.

Importance of Prompt Reporting

Prompt registration of an FIR helps:

• Preserve the informant's memory of the incident.
• Record the initial version of the alleged offence.
• Allow the police to collect evidence without unnecessary delay.
• Reduce the possibility of important facts being forgotten or changed.

Effect of Delay

An unexplained or unreasonable delay in filing an FIR may create doubt about the reliability of the prosecution's account. It may raise questions about whether the facts were altered, whether details were added later, or whether the report was influenced by other considerations.

However, delay in filing an FIR does not automatically make the prosecution's case false. The court must consider the reasons for the delay and the facts of the particular case. A reasonable explanation may remove the doubt arising from delayed reporting.

For example, a delay caused by the injured person's medical treatment or by fear of the accused may be relevant when the court assesses the circumstances.

Distinction Between an FIR and a Later Police Statement

Practical Example

Suppose a person reports to the police that a mobile phone was stolen from their home.

• The police receive information indicating that a cognizable offence may have occurred.
• The information is recorded according to the applicable legal procedure, and a copy is provided to the informant as required by law.
• The police investigate the incident and collect relevant evidence.
• If the informant later gives evidence in court, the FIR may be used to support or contradict the informant's testimony, subject to the rules of evidence.
• If the FIR was lodged after a considerable delay, the court considers the explanation for that delay before assessing the reliability of the prosecution's case.

This example demonstrates that an FIR initiates the criminal process but does not, by itself, establish the guilt of the accused.

Summary

• An FIR is the initial information recorded by the police about the commission of a cognizable offence.
• Its primary purpose is to set the criminal law in motion and enable the police to begin an investigation.
• Under the earlier CrPC framework, Section 154 governed the recording of information about cognizable offences; Section 173 of the BNSS is the corresponding provision under the current framework.
• An FIR need not contain every detail of the offence or identify the accused by name, provided it discloses the commission of a cognizable offence.
• An FIR is generally not substantive evidence, but it may be used for limited evidentiary purposes, including corroborating or contradicting its maker, subject to the applicable law.
• An unexplained delay in filing an FIR may create doubt, but delay alone does not automatically invalidate the prosecution's case.