FIRs/ First Information Reports: India - Revision history

Jyoti: /* Court judgements */

2024-04-15T21:13:52Z

‎Court judgements

Jyoti: /* Quashing an FIR */

2023-10-06T13:05:52Z

‎Quashing an FIR

Jyoti at 18:00, 28 July 2023

2023-07-28T18:00:20Z

Pdewan: Pdewan moved page First Information Report (FIR): India to FIRs/ First Information Reports: India without leaving a redirect

2023-06-28T08:22:33Z

Pdewan moved page First Information Report (FIR): India to FIRs/ First Information Reports: India without leaving a redirect

Jyoti: /* Multiple FIRs/ clubbing of cases */

2023-02-23T12:29:57Z

‎Multiple FIRs/ clubbing of cases

Jyoti: /* Zero FIR */

2022-07-13T18:23:58Z

‎Zero FIR

Jyoti: /* Court */

2021-11-13T19:48:26Z

‎Court

Jyoti: /* Acting on an FIR */

2021-11-13T19:48:10Z

‎Acting on an FIR

Jyoti: /* Languages used, state-wise */

2021-08-13T19:40:22Z

‎Languages used, state-wise

Jyoti: /* Delayed FIRs */

2021-07-19T21:21:36Z

‎Delayed FIRs

@@ Line 135: / Line 135: @@
 The accused had claimed they were falsely implicated in the matter.
-[[Category:Crime|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
+=Courts’ powers=
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
+==Quashing FIRs: Sessions courts do not have the power==
-[[Category:India|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
+[https://epaper.indiatimes.com/article-share?article=12_04_2024_009_003_cap_TOI  Swati Deshpande, April 12, 2024: ''The Times of India'']
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
-[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
-[[Category:Pages with broken file links|FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
-[[Category:Crime|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
+Mumbai:In a full bench judgment, Bombay HC on Wednesday finally clarified that a sessions court is not empowered and thus, can’t quash an FIR, but can interfere with and stay an order passed by a magistrate that directs police, in a private complaint, to register an FIR.
-[[Category:India|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
+ A private complaint is a legal provision to approach a magistrate to seek directions to the police for lodging and probing an FIR for cognizable offences. The magistrate’s power stems from section 156(3) of criminal procedure code. The sessions court can stay amagistrate’s order under section 156(3) for police to register an FIR. In such a case, when FIR is yet to be registered, the interim stay bars police from registering it or starting any probe, held Justices Revati Mohite Dere, N J Jamadar and S U Deshmukh on the full bench.
-[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
+ The second scenario is if an FIR gets registered before the sessions court can pass interim orders. Here, the sessions court can stay a further probe, and even set aside the magistrate’s order, but only on proof that the lower court wrongly or illegally exercised its jurisdiction in the first place, HC ruled. The full bench clarified that if the order is set aside by sessions after FIR is filed or after chargesheet is submitted, it would not result in quashing of FIR or criminal prosecution. The full bench had last Aug reserved a legal reference on the vexed issue for orders. In one matter, the sessions court had quashed a Kalyan magistrate’s order to register an FIR and probe offences of cheating against former KDMC civic chief filed in 2022.
-[[Category:Pages with broken file links|FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
+[[Category:Crime|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRS/ FIRST INFORMATION REPORTS: INDIA
 =Delayed FIRs=

@@ Line 285: / Line 285: @@
  The SC had asked courts to bear in mind nature and effect of the offence on the conscience of society, seriousness of injury, if any; voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and victim and conduct of the accused prior to and after the purported offence.
-[[Category:Crime|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
+=Religion=
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
+==Do not mention religion: HC==
-[[Category:India|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
+[https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/stop-mentioning-religion-in-firs-proceedings-hc-to-haryana-dgp/articleshow/103481898.cms  Ajay Sura, Sep 8, 2023: ''The Times of India'']
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
 [[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
+CHANDIGARH: Taking a serious note of the fact that religion of the accused is being mentioned in FIRs or police proceedings by the Haryana Police, the Punjab and Haryana high court has directed the state DGP to stop this practice. The HC had last year restrained the Punjab Police from disclosing the religion of the accused in FIRs.
 [[Category:Pages with broken file links|FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
+In the order, which was released on Wednesday, the HC directed Haryana DGP Shatrujeet Singh Kapur to file an affidavit by September 18 about corrective measures that will be taken by the state in this regard.
 = Zero FIR=

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
-[[Category:Crime|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
+[[File: One of the FIRs that have been translated and digitised. (Express Photo) One of the FIRs that have been translated and digitised. (Express Photo).jpg|One of the FIRs that have been translated and digitised. (Express Photo) One of the FIRs that have been translated and digitised. (Express Photo) <br/> From: [https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/oranges-pyjamas-and-kulfi-polices-earliest-firs-offer-a-glimpse-of-life-crime-in-delhi-8689443/  Jignasa Sinha, June 28, 2023: ''The Indian Express'']|frame|500px]]
-[[Category:India|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
+It was a cold case of deceit. Shiva had asked his relative Fateh to look for a suitable match for him. Fateh and his associate took Rs 20 from Shiva, promising to get him married to a 16-year-old girl. On the day of the wedding, Shiva realised to his horror that the bride was an old woman, who fled from the scene. Shiva, poorer by a bride and Rs 20, filed a case.
-[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
-FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
+The case, dating back to 1900, is among the earliest FIRs that have been uploaded on the Delhi Police’s website as part of a digitisation effort.
 =Acting on an FIR=
@@ Line 206: / Line 237: @@
 [[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
 FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
-[[Category:Pages with broken file links|FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
 =Multiple FIRs/ clubbing of cases=
@@ Line 283: / Line 314: @@
 [[Category:Pages with broken file links|FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
 FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:29, 23 February 2023
Line 235:		Line 235:

	The Goswami and Anthony rulings are both valid precedents that were binding on the vacation Bench. However, in an oral observation, the vacation Bench said that “if the conscience of the Court is not satisfied, the law can be moulded”.		The Goswami and Anthony rulings are both valid precedents that were binding on the vacation Bench. However, in an oral observation, the vacation Bench said that “if the conscience of the Court is not satisfied, the law can be moulded”.
		+
		+	=Quashing an FIR=
		+	==Can be done even after conviction: HC==
		+	[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/article-share?article=03_02_2023_015_013_cap_TOI Swati Deshpande, February 3, 2023: ''The Times of India'']
		+
		+	Mumbai : Noting that the power to quash an FIR can be exercised post-conviction when an appeal against the guilty verdict is pending before a higher court, the Bombay high court set aside a 2017 “cruelty to wife” case against her husband and in-laws.
		+
		+	The HC ruling was in a quashing petition filed under Section 482 of CrPC, a provision that enables the court to exercise its inherent powers to secure the ends of justice.
		+	In 2021, a magistrate had held the accused husband and in-laws guilty of cruelty under Section 498A of IPC and criminal intimidation against which they filed an appeal and which is pending before a sessions court.
		+
		+	Aurangabad’s HC bench, in its January 18 ruling, noted in 2021, the Supreme Court had dealt with a question of whether its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution can be invoked to quash criminal proceedings arising out of“non-compoundable” offences (which cannot be settled out of court). The HC, quoting the SC verdict, noted it said the “. . . touchstone for exercising the extraordinary powers under Article 142 or Section 482 CrPC, would be to do complete justice.
		+
		+	Therefore, this court or the high court, . . . after having given due regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that the victim/complainant has willingly entered into a settlement/compromise, can quash proceedings in exercise of their respective constitutional/inherent powers. ”
		+
		+	The HC factored in the fact that the FIR emanated from amatrimonial dispute and said, “Considering the nature of accusations and particularly that the parties have now decided to put an end to their strained relationship and move on with life, we are of the view that this is a fit case to exercise inherent power of this court. ” The SC had said HC can exercise its quashing power under Section 482 “only where an appeal is pending before one or the other judicial forum”.
		+	Since in the case before it the appeal was pending in the sessions court in Aurangabad, the HC said there was no embargo to quash the criminal proceedings. The HC noted the wife also confirmed she and her husband “separated by way of khula” and she had received Rs 3. 25 lakh and agreed to the quashing.
		+
		+	The SC had asked courts to bear in mind nature and effect of the offence on the conscience of society, seriousness of injury, if any; voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and victim and conduct of the accused prior to and after the purported offence.
		+
		+	[[Category:Crime\|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
		+	FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:India\|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
		+	FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary\|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
		+	FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:Pages with broken file links\|FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
		+	FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]

	= Zero FIR=		= Zero FIR=

@@ Line 207: / Line 207: @@
 FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
 [[Category:Pages with broken file links|FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
 = Zero FIR=
@@ Line 220: / Line 248: @@
 As per the Sec 154 of Criminal procedure Code, every Police officer is law bound to register the First Information Report of any cognizable offence committed, irrespective of the jurisdiction in which the offence was committed. When a cognizable offence is reported, the police officer registering the case forthwith starts the investigation, if it is committed in his jurisdiction. if it is not committed in his jurisdiction, he registers the FIR under number 00 and sends it to the police station, where the offence was committed for further investigation. Such FIR is called as zero FIR. It is for the convenience of the victim that instead of making the victim run from pillar to post, the police officer, where the victim approaches as per his convenience, the case is recorded and police officer sends it to the concerned police station.
-[[Category:Crime|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
+[[Category:Crime|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
 FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
-[[Category:India|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
+[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
 FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
-[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
+[[Category:Pages with broken file links|FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
 FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]

@@ Line 83: / Line 83: @@
 Justice Mishra had passed a similar order in 2010 when he was the Chief Justice of the Delhi high court but the order has not been complied with in letter and spirit.
-=Court=
+=Court judgements=
 ==Not naming accused in FIR doesn’t discredit case==
 [https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL/2021/11/11&entity=Ar01502&sk=12A58D40&mode=text  Usha Das, Nov 11, 2021: ''The Times of India'']
@@ Line 103: / Line 103: @@
 The accused had claimed they were falsely implicated in the matter.
 [[Category:Crime|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:48, 13 November 2021
Line 82:		Line 82:

	Justice Mishra had passed a similar order in 2010 when he was the Chief Justice of the Delhi high court but the order has not been complied with in letter and spirit.		Justice Mishra had passed a similar order in 2010 when he was the Chief Justice of the Delhi high court but the order has not been complied with in letter and spirit.
		+
		+	=Court=
		+	==Not naming accused in FIR doesn’t discredit case==
		+	[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL/2021/11/11&entity=Ar01502&sk=12A58D40&mode=text Usha Das, Nov 11, 2021: ''The Times of India'']
		+
		+	A Delhi court has framed charges of rioting and arson against four people in two separate northeast Delhi riots cases, saying FIR is not an encyclopedia but the beginning point of investigation and not naming accused in FIR does not discredit the case of the prosecution at all.
		+
		+	Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat framed charges against Suraj, Yogender Singh, Ajay and Gorav for the offences under sections 147 and 148 (rioting), 427 (mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees), 436 (mischief by fire or explosive substance), 188 (disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant), read with Section 149 (unlawful assembly) of IPC.
		+
		+	They were charged for burning the shops of Javed Khan and Gulfam during the riots on February 25 last year.
		+
		+	“On the basis of the contents of the chargesheet duly supported by the statement of the witnesses, it has come on record that riotous mob consisting of 100-150 people armed with lathis and danda and including the accused people had entered into the shop of the complainant Javed Khan and committed mischief and destruction by fire of the said shop by the unlawful assembly in prosecution of common object,” the court said earlier.
		+
		+	It further said that the contention of the accused that witnesses cannot be believed or their statements as recorded late, hence cannot be relied upon, cannot be a basis for discharge as it is a matter of trial. “Moreover, the submissions that the police witnesses are not independent witnesses but interested for a ground of disregarding their statement, are without a legal basis,” it added.
		+
		+	The court further said there was video footage showing Suraj and Yogender near the place of the incident. It noted that beat officers, who were deputed on duty on February 25, 2020, had also identified them as part of the rioters.
		+	It said that witnesses have also described the incident involving more than 100-200 rioters armed with rods and danda, and hence, there was a common object that can be ascribed to the accused people in committing the said offence of rioting and mischief. It added that “a public witness has specifically identified accused Ajay and Gorav as part of the riotous mob, which ransacked and burnt the shops of the complainants.”
		+
		+	“Thus, on the basis of the material on record, I am of the opinion that there are grounds for presuming that the accused people namely Suraj, Yogender Singh, Ajay and Gorav have committed offences under sections 147,148, 427,436,188 IPC read with Section 149 IPC,” the judge said.
		+
		+	The accused had claimed they were falsely implicated in the matter.
		+
		+	[[Category:Crime\|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
		+	FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:India\|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
		+	FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary\|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
		+	FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:Pages with broken file links\|FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
		+	FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]

	=Delayed FIRs=		=Delayed FIRs=

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:40, 13 August 2021
Line 149:		Line 149:

	The head of the state crime records bureau, said the department has initiated the move to incorporate simple Hindi words in the complaints.		The head of the state crime records bureau, said the department has initiated the move to incorporate simple Hindi words in the complaints.
		+
		+	===HC: Can use simple Urdu words in FIRs===
		+	[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL%2F2019%2F12%2F12&entity=Ar01810&sk=769C00D1&mode=text Dec 12, 2019 ''Times of India'']
		+
		+	Delhi high court asked police to upload on its website a list of around 380 Urdu and Persian words and their meanings, whose use has been prohibited.
		+
		+	A bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice C Hari Shankar also clarified that Urdu and Persian words of general use can be used by police and only the archaic ones need to be weeded out. “Archaic Urdu and Persian words ought not to be utilised (while lodging FIRs) and that is what we intended to convey by our August 7 order in a separate pending PIL before us,” the court said.
		+
		+	The court’s observation came while hearing two petitions. In a plea filed by one Naima Pasha, the petitioner argued that using the court’s order, a police circular of November 20 tries to do away with even general Urdu and Persian words as some of these also figured in the list of 383 terms.
		+
		+	In the other petition by advocate Vishalakshi Goel, the high court had on November 25 called for 100 FIR copies to ascertain whether the circular of November 20 was being adhered to. On Wednesday, police submitted the FIR copies before the bench that pointed out that words prohibited in the circular are still being used.
		+
		+	[[Category:Crime\|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
		+	FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:India\|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
		+	FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary\|FFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIAFIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA
		+	FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]
		+	[[Category:Pages with broken file links\|FIRST INFORMATION REPORT (FIR): INDIA]]

	= Zero FIR=		= Zero FIR=

@@ Line 100: / Line 100: @@
 Another 21.5% said that they did not know how to file a case since the legal system is too complex, while 17.3% of the respondents said cases takes too long to be resolved in court.
-% of respondents surveyed said the police wanted them to compromise with the other party instead
+% of respondents surveyed said the police wanted them to compromise with the other party instead.
 =Languages used, state-wise=