Can the Constitution of India be altered completely ?

Can the Constitution of India be altered completely ?

Why is it in the news?

1.The ruling party BJP gave the slogan of “Abki bar char so par” in the eighteenth general election for Lok Sabha. This means that, BJP wants to get 400 seats out of 543 seats in Lok Sabha. 

2.Bjp MP of Faizabad, Lallu Singh, Bjp candidate Mrs Jyoti Mirdha and former union minister Anant Kumar Hegde from Karnataka asserted that it was necessary to get 400 seats in Lok Sabha so that the constitution can be altered. 

3.The moot question is : can our constitution be altered completely? 

What is the process of amendment? 

1.So far 106 amendments have been made in our constitution. Our constitution is a mixture of rigidity and flexibility. It is the living document. So, unlike the US constitution which is very much rigid, our constitution has been amended to fulfil the changing societal needs. 

2.Article 368, contains provision for the amendment of our constitution. 

3.A bill for amendment can be introduced only in either House of the Parliament, not in the state legislatures.

4.An amendment bill can be introduced either by a minister or a private member and does not require prior permission of the President.

5.The bill must be passed in each House of the Parliament by a special majority that is a majority of more than 50% of the total membership of the House and a majority of two thirds of the members of the House, present and voting. For example, if Rajya Sabha has 240 members, the absolute majority would be 121. Suppose on that day, the total number of members present in the Rajya were 200. And suppose 180 members voted on the bill and 20 members absented themselves.  2/3rd of 180 members would be 120. So in order to pass the bill at least 121 members are required to vote in favour of the amendment. Suppose all 240 members were  present and they participated in the voting,  then 2/3rd majority will be 160. So, in order to pass the bill, 160 votes are needed. 

6.Each House must pass the bill separately. There is no provision for joint sitting of Parliament in case of a constitutional amendment bill. If the bill is passed by both Houses of the Parliament, it must be presented before the President for his assent. Once the President assents to the bill, it becomes an act. Those provisions which require special majority include fundamental rights, Directive Principles of State Policy, Fundamental Duties.

7.In case the constitutional amendment bill is with respect to the federal provisions of our constitution, in addition to the Parliamentary approval of special majority, at least half of the state legislature must ratify the bill with simple majority. For example, election of the President, executive power of the union and the states, provisions related to the Supreme Court and the High Courts. Goods and Services tax council, distribution of legislative powers between the union and states. Any of the list of the seventh schedule, representation of the states in the Parliament, power of Parliament to amend the constitution and its procedure under article 368. 

8.According to the 24th amendment act, it has become mandatory for the President of India to give his assent to the constitutional amendment bill passed by the Parliament. So unlike ordinary bills, he can neither withhold his assent to the bill nor return the bill for reconsideration by the Parliament. 

9.There are several provisions in our constitution which can be amended by a simple majority. These amendments fall outside the jurisdiction of article 368. These are creation of new states, alteration of the boundaries of and the changes of names of existing states, fifth and sixth schedule of our constitution, abolition and creation of legislative council in a state, rules of procedure in Parliament, citizenship, delimitation of the constituencies, union territories, use of official language, privileges of Parliament. 

Basic structure of the constitution

1.On 24th April 1973, the 13 judges bench of the Supreme Court overruled the judgement in Golaknath case (1967) where it held that the Parliament was not competent to amend fundamental rights covered under part III of our constitution. By 24th amendment, Parliament asserted that it could amend any part of the constitution. In Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), the Supreme Court approved the 24th amendment and held that Parliament could amend any part of the constitution but it could not alter the basic structure of the constitution. The doctrine of basic structure was applied in the Indira Nehru Gandhi case (1975). The Supreme Court invalidated the provision of 39th amendment act which kept the election disputes related to the Prime Minister and Lok Sabha Speaker outside the judicial review of any court of India. The Supreme Court held that the judicial review is a part of the basic structure of the constitution and Parliament is not competent to amend it. 

2.By the 42nd amendment (1976) article 368 was amended and it provided that there is no limitation on the constituent power of Parliament and no amendment can be questioned in any court on any ground including that of contravention of any of the fundamental rights. However, the Supreme Court in the Minerva Mills case (1980) invalidated this provision. It stated that since the constitution has conferred a limited amending power on the Parliament, Parliament could not under the exercise of that limited power enlarge that very power into an absolute power. 

3.Again in the Vaman Rao case (1980), the Supreme Court held that all the constitutional amendments enacted after 24th April 1973 would come under judicial review.

It did not define what constitutes basic structure in the Keshvanand Bharati case (1973)? But, in the catena of judgements it defined basic structure. These are - 

• Supremacy of the constitution

• Sovereign democratic and republican nature of the Indian Polity

• Federal character of the constitution

• Separation of powers 

• Parliamentary democracy

• Independence of judiciary 

• Powers of the Supreme Court under articles 32,136,141 and 142

• Powers of the High Court under articles 226 and 227

• Effective access to the justice

• Principle of equality 

• Free and fair election

• Limited power of the Parliament to amend the constitution

• Rule of law

• Judicial review 

• Secular character of the constitution

• Unity and integrity of nation

• Fundamental rights

4.Conclusion

1.As of now, on account of the  doctrine of the basic structure of the constitution, the Parliament has limited power and so it cannot alter our constitution completely. If Parliament does so, the Supreme Court will test the amendment act and if it finds that amendment act infringes upon basic structure of the constitution, it will declare that amendment act ultra vires. Thus, for example, if Parliament changes Parliamentary democracy to Presidential democracy, it will be hit by the doctrine of basic structure and so the Supreme Court will invalidate the amendment act. So, even after getting two third majority in both Houses of the Parliament, a party cannot bring total annihilation of our constitution. The ultimate guardian and protector of our constitution is the Supreme Court of India. 

What legal actions can be taken in non cognizable offence ?

 

What legal actions can be taken in non cognizable offence ?

1.Introduction

• On the basis of the seriousness of the offence, they can be classified in the following ways.

• Bailable and non bailable offence 

• Cognizable and non cognizable offence 

• Compoundable and non compoundable offence

A. Bailable offences are those offences in which the accused has the right to get bail. When such a crime occurs, the SHO cannot deny bail to the accused. 

Non-Bailable offences are those offences in which SHO of a police station cannot give bail to the accused except in exceptional circumstances. Only courts are empowered to give bail to the accused. 

B. Cognizable offences are those offences in which it is mandatory for the SHO to register the case at the police station. He can arrest the accused without warrant and investigate the case without the prior court order. Cognizable offences are generally heinous in nature. The seriousness of the offence depends upon the maximum punishment provided for the offence. By and large, offences punishable with imprisonment for not less than three years are taken as serious offences and have been put under cognizable offences. These are murder, rape, kidnapping, theft, dowry death, waging war against the Government of India, criminal breach of trust, unnatural sex under section 377 IPC. 

Non-Cognizable offences are those offences which cannot be registered without the permission of the court having the jurisdiction over the police station. Police cannot arrest the accused without a warrant. Nor can it start the investigation. These offences are non serious in nature. Offences relating to marriage u/s 493-497 IPC are punishable for more than 5 years, they are non-cognizable offences because they are in the nature of private wrongs. The crimes of cheating u/s 417, forgery u/s 465, assault u/s 352, defamation u/s 500, causing miscarriage u/s 312, voluntarily causing hurt u/s 323, come under  non-cognizable offence. 

It may be noted that certain offences which are not punishable with imprisonment for three years or more have been made cognizable. Offences against the public tranquillity under chapter 8 of IPC are punishable less than three years of imprisonment yet they have been made cognizable. Similarly, negligently doing any act to spread infection of any disease being dangerous to life u/s 269-270, offence of defiling water of public spring u/s 277 or offence of dealing with any poisonous or explosive substance so as to endanger human life u/s 284,285,286 IPC or uttering any word or gesture to insult the modesty of woman u/s 509 of IPC have been made cognizable even though the punishment provided for them is not severe. 

Similarly, under the protection of civil rights act 1955, the punishment is 6 months or /and with fine, but offences under this act have been made cognizable. 

2.Powers of the Police Officers to investigate a non cognizable offence

• The Police officer is not authorised to register the case in non cognizable offence. 

• The police cannot arrest any person without warrant in matters relating to a non cognizable offence. Nor can it initiate investigation on its own. 

• The police officer must seek an order from the magistrate u/s 155(2) Crpc to initiate the investigation of the case. In the case of K P Mohammand vs State of Kerala (1981), the Supreme Court held that “if a police officer investigates a non cognizable offence without the prior order of the magistrate, it may be considered as violative of article 21 of the constitution.” The court held that “if a breach is not noticed at an early stage and the trial is concluded, the defect or illegality of investigation would not vitiate trial, unless it causes prejudice to the accused and results in the miscarriage of justice in terms of section 465 of Crpc.” 

• However, when two or more offences have occurred in which one case pertains to cognizable offence and other offences are under the category of non-cognizable, the entire case will be treated as cognizable offence and police are not required to take permission from the magistrate to lodge FIR or register and investigate the case. 

• It is open to the magistrate either to grant permission or refuse to grant permission in such cases. Where he permits for the initiation of investigation, he will have to give a speaking order as to the reason for his permission in detail.  

• The magistrate can be approached either by the complainant or the concerned SHO of the police station in matters relating to non cognizable offences.  

• If a magistrate is not empowered and erroneously orders in good faith an investigation u/s 155(2), the proceedings shall not be set aside merely on the ground of his not being so empowered according to section 460 (b) of Crpc. 

• It will be unlawful for the SHO to register the FIR in non-cognizable offence and then approach the magistrate having jurisdiction for permission. 

• Once the magistrate has permitted to register the case in non- cognizable offence, the SHO will register a first information report and will send a copy of the report to the magistrate having jurisdiction u/s 158 of the Crpc. The report should be sent to the magistrate without any delay. However, the police will not arrest the accused without a warrant. 

3.Difference between grievous hurt and simple hurt ?

• U/s 319, hurt is defined to voluntarily cause bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any person. 

• U/s 320, grievous hurt is defined as the hurt of the following kinds - 

1. Emasculation

2. Permanent privation of the sight of either eye

3. Permanent privation of the hearing of either ear

4. Privation of any member or joint

5. Destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint.

6. Permanent disfiguration of the head or face.

7. Fracture of dislocation of a bone or tooth

8. Any hurt which endangers life or which causes the sufferer to be during the space of 20 days in severe bodily pain or unable to follow its ordinary pursuits.

• If the hurt is not covered u/s 320 Crpc, they are simple hurts or injuries. 

4.Kinds of wounds 

• A wound is an injury that breaks the skin or other bodily tissue. 

• Wounds can be of two kinds - open and closed. In the open wound the skin is broken and the body tissues are exposed. In the closed wound, tissues are damaged underneath the skin. 

• In the open categories of wounds, mentions may be made about by sharp edged weapon like Punctured wound, Incised wound and Surgical wound

a. Thermal, chemical, and  electric burns

b. Bites and Stings

c. Gunshot wounds 

• Wounds caused by blunt force/weapon  -

A .Abrasions

B .Laceration

C .Skin tears

• Closed wounds are caused by blunt force. Though the injured tissue is not exposed there can be bleeding and damage to the underlying muscle, internal organs and bones. 

• Measure types of closed wounds are -

A. Contusions or bruises 

B. Blisters

C. Seroma

D. Hematoma

E. Crushed injuries

• The other closed wounds are caused by ulcer on account of diabetes mellitus and cancer

5.Conclusion

• As we have narrated above, the police cannot deny to register the case with regard to open wounds caused by sharpened edged weapons or otherwise like burns or gunshot injuries. But where the complainant or the injured person got closed wounds like contusions or bruises or seroma, hematoma, blisters or crush injuries, the police adopt the dilly-dally tactics and register the case u/s 155 of Crpc. The substance of the case is entered into the non cognizable register and a copy of the said report is given to the complainant for lodging his complaint in the court. Where the complainant is resourceful and politically powerful, the police register converts non cognizable offences into cognizable offences by adding sections 294, 506 B of IPC. Thus, in the non cognizable offence which is also called miscellaneous offence, the police uses its discretionary power. The doctor converts serious injury into  simple injury. And the outcome is that in most of the cases, the poor, the downtrodden or illiterate people of India suffer. It is, therefore, incumbent upon the supervisory officer to inspect the non cognizable register and the medical examination report kept at every police station. By the vigilant action of the supervisory and superior police officer, the poor and the illiterate people of India can get justice. Moreover, it is high time that both cognizable and non-cognizable offences should be merged into one, thereby, doing away with the malpractices by police officers at police stations in the name of differentiation between cognizable and non-cognizable offences. Sooner the Parliament makes the law on this behalf, the better would be the prospect of getting justice by the common people who are the acute sufferers.  

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.