Criminal Law and Legal Principles of Genuineness of FIR Explained by Supreme Court

Criminal Law and Legal Principles of Genuineness of FIR Explained by Supreme Court

In a recent case, the issue of genuineness of FIR was discussed.

It was noted thus : "Apparently, thus, the close relatives of the deceased had gone to the police station in the late hours of 19th September itself. If this version was true then, in natural course, these persons were bound to divulge about the incident to the police and their statement/s which would presumably be about an incident of the homicidal death would have mandatorily been entered in the Daily Dairy of the police station if not treated to be the FIR. However, the Daily Diary or the Roznamcha entry of the police station corresponding to the so called visit by the relatives of the deceased to the police station was not brought on record which creates a grave doubt on the genuineness of the FIR". 

Conduct of Family Members

It was observed that "the conduct of the family members of the deceased and the other villagers in not taking any steps to protect the dead body for the whole night and instead, casually going back to their houses without giving a second thought as to what may happen to the mortal remains of the deceased, lying exposed to the elements is another circumstance which creates a grave doubt in the mind of the Court that no one had actually seen the incident and it was a case of blind murder which came to light much later. if at all the sequence of events as emanating from the evidence of the prosecution witnesses was having even a grain of truth, then it cannot be believed that the dead body would be abandoned in this manner or that even the police officials would not put a guard at the crime scene."

Law on Disclosure Statement

The statement of an accused recorded by a police officer under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is basically a memorandum of confession of the accused recorded by the Investigating Officer during interrogation which has been taken down in writing. The confessional part of such statement is inadmissible and only the part which distinctly leads to discovery of fact is admissible in evidence.

Thus, when the Investigating Officer steps into the witness box for proving such disclosure statement, he would be required to narrate what the accused stated to him. As per Section 60 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 oral evidence in all cases must be direct. The section leaves no ambiguity and mandates that no secondary/hearsay evidence can be given in case of oral evidence, except for the circumstances enumerated in the section. In case of a person who asserts to have heard a fact, only his evidence must be given in respect of the same. 

Can Memorandum prepared by IO has an Effect ?

Mere exhibiting of memorandum prepared by the Investigating Officer during investigation cannot tantamount to proof of its contents. While testifying on oath, the Investigating Officer would be required to narrate the sequence of events which transpired leading to the recording of the disclosure statement.

Case : Babu Sahebagouda Rudragouda v. State of Karnataka [2024] GCtR 3486 (SC)