Evidentiary Value of FIR

Issue: What is the evidentiary value of FIR in a criminal trial?

In Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar, AIR 1966 SC 119 the Supreme Court answered ths question in the following words:

Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides for the recording of the first information. The evidentiary value of FIR
under the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act is as follows:

(1) The information report as such is not substantive evidence.

(2) It may be used to corroborate the informant under Section 157 of the Evidence Act or to contradict him under Section
145 of the Act, if the informant is called as a witness.

(3) If the first information is given by the accused himself, the fact of his giving the information is admissible against him as
evidence of his conduct under Section 8 of the Evidence Act.

(4) If the information is a non-confessional statement, it is admissible against the accused as an admission under Section 21
of the Evidence Act and is relevant.

(5) A confessional first information report to a police officer cannot be used against the accused in view of Section 25 of the
Evidence Act
Note: FIR can also be treated as res gestae and therefore relevant under section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act.
 It has been held time and again that the FIR is not a substantive piece of evidence and can only be used to corroborate the
statement of the maker under Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 or to contradict him under Section 145 of that
Act. It can neither be used as evidence against the maker at the trial if he himself becomes an accused nor to corroborate
or contradict other witnesses. [ Justice Arijit Pasayat in Ravi Kumar v. State of Punjab (SC, March, 2005)]

However there is an exception to the general rule that the FIR is not a substantive piece of evidence. This exception can be
illustrated with the help of decision of Allahabad High Court in Pancham Yadav v. State of U.P. (All. H.C. 1993), wherein the
Information given by the victim was recorded as FIR. Later on he died. This FIR was also treated as a dying declaration
under section 32(1) of Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Therefore, this is the only circumstances when FIR becomes substantive piece of evidence.
Who Lodged the Evidentiary Value of FIR
FIR
1. FIR by Victim Relevant u/s Relevant u/s 6 Relevant u/s 8 Relevant u/s 145 Relevant u/s 157
32 of IEA (As of IEA as Res of IEA of IEA of IEA
a Substantive gestae
Piece of
Evidence)
2. FIR by Third Relevant u/s 6 Relevant u/s 145 Relevant u/s 157
Person (if called as of IEA as Res of IEA of IEA
gestae
witness at the Trial
3. FIR by Accused Relevant u/s Relevant u/s 8 Relevant u/s 157
21 of IEA. of IEA of IEA (Do
connect it with
Section 25 of
IEA)

Note: If FIR is filed by the Accused and he appears as a Witness at the time of Trial, then the FIR can be used as an
evidence as per the provisions of Sections 145 and 157 of the Indian Evidence Act. [See Section 315 of CrPC on this point]
 Quashing of FIR

High Court is empowered to quash an FIR (also a complaint as well) to protect the accused from malicious prosecution. For
example, when FIR is instituted with mala-fide intention to harass the accused person, the court can quash the same for the
ends of justice.

FIR can be quashed by the High Court in the exercise of inherent power vested in it under Section 482 of CrPC. (Such power
can also be exercised on a petition filed under the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section
482 of CrPC)

Therefore, Once an FIR is registered, the accused person can approach the High Court under Section 482 CrPC or under Article
226 of the Constitution or Article 226 r/w Section 482 CrPC for quashing of the FIR, [See State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992
Supp (1) SCC 335]

The power of High to quash an FIR are to be exercised sparingly and that too, in rare and appropriate cases and in extreme
circumstances to prevent abuse of process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.

Question: If X files an FIR against Y with a malafide intention to harass him. Y approaches you for legal advice. What legal
remedy/remedies are available to Y under law?
Cases in which Power to Quash an FIR (also a complaint) can be exercised:
Supreme Court in several cases has observed that it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and
sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad cases where
power to quash an FIR should be exercised.

However, in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, the Supreme Court gave a illustrative list of case in
which High Court can exercise its extraordinary power to quash an FIR (or a complaint). These are as follows: [Para 102]

(1) Where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their
entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
Note: Recently, this rule was reiterated by the Supreme Court in Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. State of Maharashtra, AIR
2021 SC 1.

(2) Where the allegations in the FIR and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence,
justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within
the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same
do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence,
no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of
the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no
prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a
criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific
provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.

For example, the High Court can quash the criminal proceeding which is carried on in breach of pre legal requirement Sections
195, 196, 197, 198 & 199 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted
with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal
grudge.

Note: The Court has clarified that the said parameters or guidelines are not exhaustive but only illustrative. Nevertheless, it
throws light on the circumstances and situations where the Court's inherent power can be exercised.