INTRODUCTION
Investigation:
The term investigation has been used many times above. This
term has been defined in S.2 (h) of the CrPC and includes all
the activities carried out by a police officer or any other officer
authorized by a magistrate that are associated with the collection
of evidence.
3
The Supreme Court has had the opportunity to consider what the
activities that constitute an investigation are. The Court said that
an investigation consists of:
1 (2014) 2 SCC 1.
5
2 37CrLJ 357.
3
6
Once, the FIR is recorded Sections 156 and 157 of the CrPC come
into play. S.157 lays down the procedure for investigation. The
police officer has to send a report to the appropriate Magistrate
and take necessary steps for carrying out investigation. The
Proviso to S.157(1) lays down a few exceptions from the
procedure prescribed under S.157(1) but the officer in charge of
the police station should record reasons for doing do as is laid
down under S.157(2). If the officer in charge of the police station
is desirous of going ahead with the investigation he can do so.
S.156 gives the power to investigate cognizable cases without
order of the Magistrate. S.156 (2) is crucial as it empowers the
police to carry out investigation in any area without the
investigation being called into question. As has been
7
The main object of FIR from the point of view of the informant is
to set the criminal law into motion and from the point of view of
the investigating authorities is to obtain information about the
alleged criminal activity so as to be able to take suitable steps to
trace and bring to book the guilty. It has been held that Section
154 has three-fold objective, that is
The informant, who in most cases will be a common man, may not
know his right under CrPC that he can approach SP in such cases,
and would be helpless to take any action against such officer. This
negligence on part of the Police Officers may hamper the law and
order in the society. Also, even if the person knows about such
right of going to the SP, he/she may ignore such right if he/she is
a mere witness to the incident since he/she would be reluctant to
go into too much of hassle. Further, sending the information to
the SP by post may take too much of time and by that time the
evidence and witnesses may be manipulated by the accused. This
makes the main objective of FIR completely futile.
From this discussion it is quite evident that FIR is, in fact, a highly
valuable and vital piece of evidence in a criminal trial. It is
necessary to corroborate the oral evidence in the case. It is the
first version of the incident and is of considerable value as it
reveals the materials that the investigation commences with and
what the original version of the story was. It has high practical
value since the information is from the earliest instance, when the
memory is clear and vivid But, as discussed above, it is not
mandatory and if it is not recorded then it would not affect the
trial in any way. However, this would lead to the situation where
the Police Officer may show indolence in filing FIR and would not
take any initiative for conducting investigation into the crime,
even after receiving information about such crime.
8 Sheikh Hasib alias Tabarak v. The State of Bihar, (1972) 4 SCC 773.
13
However, the mere fact that F.I.R.has been lodged early does not
rule out the chances of embellishment or falsehood in every
case9.
Where delay in filing the F.I.R. in a rape case had taken place , the
court was satisfied by the explanation that since the honour of a
family was involved, the the comoplaint was delayed, this was
decided in the case of Harpal Singh vs State of H.P12.
Similarly, where the murder took place at about 7:30 p.m. and
F.I.R. was lodged next morning at about 7:30 a.m., the police
station being 7 k.m. away and the informant having admitted that
due to the apprehension of danger of his life, he did not go in the
night. It was held that this situation was eligible for condoning of
delay.
Thus , there is no hard and fast rule that delay in lodging the F.I.R.
would automatically render the case doubtful.it depends on the
facts and circumstances in each case.
Zero F.I.R.:
4. In this case, Supreme Court for the first time clarified that
F.I.R. will be admissible in evidence as a whole not in parts
but with a rider that in case the non-confessional part has no
connection with the confessional part then the former will be
relevant under Section 18 and Section 21.
CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY