What will you do if your case is not registered at Police Station

A. Introduction 1.When a cognizable crime occurs, it has to be registered at the nearest Police Station. This is called the First Information Report. FIR is to put law into motion. It is the starting point of investigation. The informant will have to narrate the incident. How the incident happened. Who were the culprits? If they are unknown, their descriptive rolls have to be explained. 2.If the crime is committed against women like throwing of acid under section 326 A(voluntarily causing grievous hurt by the use of acid, punishment not less than ten years but may extend to life imprisonment and with fine. The fine shall be paid to the victim.) or 326 B (Voluntarily throwing or attempting to throw acid, punishment not less than five years but it can extend to seven years with fine), outraging the modesty of the woman under section 354 (To assault or criminal force to women with intent to outrage her modesty, punishment not less than 1 year or which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine. In Andhra Pradesh, the punishment was to be not less than five years but it can extend to seven years with fine.),354 A(sexual harassment by physical contacts and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures, a demand or request for sexual favours, showing pornography against the will of a woman or making sexually coloured remarks. Punishment three years with fine or both. The punishment for making sexually coloured remarks is one year or fine or with both. In Madhya Pradesh, the punishment for disrobing a woman in a public place is not less than one year which can extend to ten years. The crime under 354A is cognizable, bailable and is triable by any magistrate),354B (criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe, the punishment is not less than three years which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine. The offence is cognizable, non bailable and triable by any magistrate.),354C (Voyeurism (to capture a image of a woman), punishment shall not be less than one year which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine or on subsequent conviction, the punishment would not be less than three years but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine. The first crime in this section is bailable and cognizable but the subsequent crime is not bailable.),354D (Stalking), the punishment is for three years and liable to fine for the first crime, for the subsequent crime the punishment may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine. The first crime is cognizable and bailable while the subsequent crime is not bailable.) or rape of woman under section 376A (punishment for causing death or resulting in persistent vegetative state of victim, the punishment shall not be less than 20 years and which may extent to imprisonment for life or with death.), 376B(sexual intercourse by husband upon his wife during separation, punishment not less than two years which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.),376C (sexual intercourse by a person in authority like public servant or superintendent of jail or head of the management of a hospital, punishment is not less than five years which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine),376D(Gang rape, punishment is not less than 20 years which may extend to life and shall also be liable to fine. The fine shall be paid to the victim),376E(punishment for repeat offenders, punishment is for life imprisonment or with death) or word, gesture or the act intended to insult the modesty of woman under section 509 IPC (the punishment with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or also liable with fine, the crime cognizable and bailable). The information with regard to the above crimes shall be recorded by a police woman officer or any woman officer. 3.If the above incident happens against the woman under the above section, the police officer will have to record the statement of the woman at her residence or at a convenient place of such person’s choice in the presence of an interpreter or a special educator. 4.The recording of such information shall be video graphed and the police officer shall have to get the statement of the person recorded by the judicial magistrate under section 164. Watch Full Video In Hindi On Youtube By Clicking On The Icon 🔻 B. Remedy from senior police officer 1.If the case is not registered by the concerned police station, the aggrieved party can approach the Superintendent of Police. He may send the substance of his information to the S.P. of the district or he may personally meet him and may submit the written petition before him. If S.P. is satisfied that the information submitted by the informant discloses cognizable offence, he shall either investigate the case himself or to direct the investigation to be made by any officers subordinate to him and such investigating officer shall have all powers of an officer in charge in relation to that offence. 2.If the offence has been committed upon woman u/s 326 A, 326B, 354, 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D, 370,370A,376,376A,376B,376C,376D,376E or 509 IPC and if the police officer failed to register the offence, the informant can register a case u/s 166A of IPC against the erring police officer. The punishment for the concerned police officer u/s 166A is not less than six months which may extend to two years and he shall also be liable to fine. C. When a police officer cannot register an FIR? 1.If the crime occurred beyond the jurisdiction of the police station where the informant has lodged information, the police officer will have to register zero FIR and then he will have to transfer that FIR to the Police Station under whose jurisdiction the crime occurred. If the concerned police officer does not write zero FIR, his action is illegal. In the case of Latika Kumari vs Government of U.P., the Supreme Court directed that it is mandatory to register FIR if the information furnished by the informant discloses cognizable offence. 2.If the information is cryptic or the information received on telephone by a police officer without any details as to the identity of the accused or the nature of injuries caused to the victims or the name of the culprit is not known. (Ravishwar Manjhi vs State of Jharkhand,2009), the police officer can refuse to register the FIR. 3.If there is inordinate delay in furnishing the information to the police station by the informant without cogent reason, the police officer can refuse to register the case and may start an inquiry. If upon the inquiry, the cognizable offence is disclosed, the police officer will have to register the offence. In the case of Latika Kumari vs Government of U.P., the Supreme Court held that in case of inordinate delay the police officer will have to start the preliminary inquiry within seven days of receiving the information of offence. D. Judicial Remedy 1.If the SP does not take any action and does not order the lodging of FIR under section 154(3) , the informant can approach the judicial magistrate u/s 156(3) read with u/s 190 of the Crpc. The said magistrate is empowered to take cognizance of the case on receiving such a complaint and he may direct the police officer to investigate the case. 2.However, if the magistrate, after the perusal of the complaint, arrives at the conclusion that the facts disclosed do not warrant registration of an FIR, the magistrate may himself take cognizance of the offence and examine the complainant u/s 200 of the Crpc. If the complaint is not made in writing, the magistrate would examine the complainant and other witness present upon oath and the substance of such examination shall be reduced in writing by the magistrate and shall be signed by the complainant, witnesses and the magistrate. The magistrate conducts an inquiry or trial or may forward the case to another magistrate for conducting inquiry or trial. In case the magistrate has no jurisdiction to conduct an inquiry or trial, he may return the complaint to the complainant u/s 201 Crpc to be presented to a magistrate who has jurisdiction. 3.In case the judicial magistrate does not take cognizance of the information furnished by the informant or does not order the police to register an FIR, the informant can file revision petition u/s 397 of Crpc before a session court. It is pertinent to note that in case a revision petition is preferred, the proposed accused must be heard by the court before deciding such revision application. E. To file writ petition in the High Court/ Supreme Court 1.The aggrieved party or informant failed to get his case registered by senior police officer or subordinate judiciary, he can file a writ petition in the High Court of the State where the offence occurred or the informant can directly file the petition u/s 32 of our constitution for issuing Mandamus to the erring police officer. 2.The aggrieved party can file a writ petition in the High Court to seek compensation if such non registration has caused damage or deprivation of his right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under article 21 of our constitution. F. Filing of petition before State human right commission or national human right commission. 1.The aggrieved party can approach the State human right commission or the national human right commission for the redressal of his grievances. He should enclose all the documents, he had submitted before the police officer or judicial magistrate. G. Conclusion 1.The ministry of home affairs, Government of India issued advisory on dated 12 October 2015. It was made clear that as per section 154(1) of the Crpc, a police officer is duty bound to register a case on the basis of such information disclosing a cognizable offence and FIR has to be registered irrespective of the territorial jurisdiction. 2.Thus, it is mandatory to register the case if the substance furnished by the informant discloses cognizable offence, failing which the erring police officer will have to face the music from judiciary, human right commissions and senior police officers.

What is the First Information Report? What is its evidentiary value ?

 What is the First Information Report? What is its evidentiary value ?

1.The First Information Report is recorded under section 154 Crpc. It is to put law into motion.  

2.The Information is to be given to the Police officer in charge of a police station having jurisdiction to investigate the case. 

3.If the information is given orally it shall be reduced into writing by the officer himself or under his direction. 

4.The information shall be signed by the informant. The information taken down in writing shall be read over to the informant.

5.The substance of the  information is then to be entered by the police officer in a book kept by him in the prescribed form. This book is called a general diary. Under Article 44 of the Police Act 1861. It is mandatory to keep a general diary to make minute to minute details about the work done by police officers, investigation reports of the different cases and cash transactions etc. 

6.Section 154 requires the FIR to be recorded verbatim in the very language of the informant to be read over and explained to him and to be signed by the informant. The idea behind reading over the information reduced into writing and obtaining the signature of the  first informant thereon are intended to ensure that what has been reduced into writing is a true and faithful version of the information given to the officer in charge of the police station.  

7.The informant then shall be forthwith given a copy of the FIR, free of cost. 

8.In the case of Palwinder Singh vs State of Punjab (1997), the Supreme Court held that, “No police officer can refuse to register the complaint if it discloses the commission of cognizable offences.” 

9. According to section 154 (3), if a person is aggrieved by non registration of his case, he may send by post the substance of such information in writing to the superintendent of the police concerned. If the superintendent of the police is satisfied that the information discloses the commission of the cognizable offence, he shall either investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a subordinate police officer in the manner provided by the court. Such subordinate police officers investigating the offence shall have all the power of an officer in charge of a police station. In relation to that offence. 

10.Provided that if the information is given by the woman against whom an offence under section 326 A, section 326 B, section 354, 354 A, 354 B, 354 C, 354 D, 376, 376 A, 376 AB, 376 B,376 C, 376 D, 376 DA, 376 DB, 376 E or 509 IPC is alleged to have been committed or attempted then such information shall be recorded by a woman police officer or any woman officer.

11.Provided further that in the event that the person against whom an offence under section 354,354 A, 354 B, 354 C, 354 D, 376, 376 A, 376 AB, 376B, 376 C, 376D, 376 DA, 376 DB, 376E or 509 IPC is alleged to have been committed or attempted or temporary or permanently is mentally of physically disabled, then such information shall be recorded by police officer at the residence of the person seeking to report such offence or at a convenience place of such person’s choice in the presence of an interpreter or a special educator, as the case may be.

12.The recording of such information shall be videographed. The police officer shall get the statement of person recorded by judicial magistrate under section 164 Crpc as soon as possible. 

Registration of FIR is mandatory 

1.In the case of Lalita Kumar vs Government of UP, the Supreme Court held that the officer concerned is duty bound to register the case on the basis of information disclosing commission of cognizable offence. Thus, it is a mandatory provision. However, if no cognizable offence is made out in the information given, then the FIR need not be registered immediately and the police may conduct a preliminary inquiry in order to ascertain as to whether a cognizable offence has been committed or not. These cases may pertain to family disputes, marriage related issues, corruption charges, medical negligence or economic offences  investigated by CBI etc. 

2.In the youth bar association of India vs Union of India, the Supreme Court held that all the FIRs registered in police stations, except those offences of sensitive nature are required to be uploaded on the official website of all States. 

3.The obligation to register FIR has been mandated because it is the first step to access justice to victims. It upholds the rule of law. It facilitates swift investigation. It avoids manipulations in criminal cases.  

4.Where an anonymous telephonic message did not disclose the names of the accused nor did it disclose a commission of a cognizable offence, it was held by the Supreme Court in the case of Tapinder Singh vs State (1970) that  such a message could not be held as FIR. 

5.In the case of Tehal Singh vs State of Rajasthan (1989), the Supreme Court held that telephonic message received by an officer in charge in police station from an ascertained person, reduced into writing discloses commission of a cognizable offence and is not cryptic or incomplete in essential details, constitute a FIR. 

6.In case of more than one person making statements to the police about the same cognizable offence, in such a situation the police officer will use common sense and record one of the statements as FIR. 

7.Statements recorded by the police in respect of a cognizable offence can be considered and used as FIR if the same is recorded before the commencement of the investigation, but not otherwise.

Evidentiary value of FIR

1.It is a settled law that a FIR is not substantial evidence. However, its importance being the earliest information regarding the occurrence cannot be doubted. Though the FIR is not substantive evidence, it can be used to corroborate the informant under section 157 evidence act or to contradict him under section 145 of the evidence act. 

2.The FIR should be lodged with the police at the earliest opportunity after the occurrence of a cognizable offence. Delay in lodging the FIR results in embellishment, exaggerated account or concocted story. Thus it is essential that the delay in lodging the FIR should be satisfactorily explained. In the case of P Rajgopal vs State of Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court held that undue delay in lodging the FIR gives rise to suspicion which puts the courts on guard to look for the possible motive and cast doubt on the prosecution version of trustworthiness.

3.If the FIR is given to the police by the accused himself it cannot possibly be used either for corroboration or contradiction. The accused cannot be the prosecution witness. 

4. If FIR is of a confessional nature,it cannot be proved against the accused informant as it would be hit by section 25 of evidence act because no confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of an offence. 

5.If the FIR given by the accused is non-confessional, it may be admissible in evidence against the accused as an admission under section 21 of evidence act or showing his conduct under section 8 of evidence act. 

6.If the first informant dies, the FIR can be used under section 32 (1) of the evidence act.