- (1.) HEARD learned Government Advocate, who has assisted the Court in hearing of this matter, which has been taken -up by the Court suo moto as Public Interest Litigation vide order passed on 10th May, 2013.
(2.) ON the last date learned Advocate General assisted this Court in the matter and placed before us an affidavit disclosing that a DGP circular dated 22.05.2013 has already been issued to take care of some of the issues causing delay in lodging of FIR in serious cases of burn etc. committed against women. However the DGP circular does not contain any direction to the police officials of the nearest police station to record an FIR within a reasonable time such as 24 hours time from recording of the statement of the victim of a serious crime having sustained serious injuries. Such statement, in case victim subsequently dies is treated as dying declaration and in case a victim recovers then it can only be treated as FIR if the police has taken timely steps to record it as such. As it would appear from the facts noticed by this Court in the order dated 10.05.2013, two female victims who were seriously injured and were under going treatment for their injuries in the hospital gave their statements to the Magistrate who was deputed by Chief Judicial Magistrate to record such statement on the prayer made by the police but yet the police authorities did not take any steps to record the FIR on the basis of the statement of the victim. The delay of several days results in looking for another source or witness for the purpose of lodging FIR. In our considered view it amounts to unreasonable inaction on the part of the concerned police official who had knowledge about the injured victim being admitted in the hospital for treatment but yet chose to ignore to record statement of the victim or to lodge FIR on the basis of statement recorded by the Magistrate as is done for purpose of recording dying declaration. The importance of early recording of an FIR has been highlighted by Apex Court in the case of Apren Joseph alias Current Kunjukunju and others Vs. The State of Kerala reported in AIR 1973(1) SC 1 in the following words: - 11. Now first information report is a report relating to the commission of an offence given to the police and recorded by it under Section 154, Cr.P.C. As observed by the Privy Council in Emperor V. Khwaja, ILR 1945 Lah 1 = (AIR 1945 PC 18) the receipt and recording of information report by the police is not a condition precedent to the setting in motion of a criminal investigation. Nor does the statute provide that such information report can only be made by an eye witness. First information report under S.154 is not even considered a substantive piece of evidence. It can only be used to corroborate or contradict the informant's evidence in court. But this information when recorded is the basis of the case set up by the informant. It is very useful if recorded before there is time and opportunity to embellish or before the informant's memory fades. Undue or unreasonable delay in lodging the F.I.R., therefore, inevitably gives rise to suspicion which puts the court on guard to look for the possible motive and the explanation for the delay and consider its effect on the trustworthiness or otherwise of the prosecution version. In our opinion, no duration of time in the abstract can be fixed as reasonable for giving information of a crime to the police, the question of reasonable time being a matter for determination by the court in each case. Mere delay in lodging the first information report with the police is, therefore, not necessarily, as a matter of law, fatal to the prosecution. The effect of delay in doing so in the light of the plausibility of the explanation forthcoming for such delay accordingly must fall for consideration on all the facts and circumstances of a given case.
(3.) LEARNED Government Advocate has submitted before us that there is no legal impediment in the way of police of the nearest police station in visiting the injured victim and recording the statement which may be treated as FIR under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is also the duty of the police to know of the statement specially when it is given by the victim in an injured condition and to act on that basis if cognizable offence is disclosed. For meeting such legal obligation, the police officials of the nearest police station must, as part of their duty to investigate a crime, find out the contents of the statement recorded by the Magistrate/ Doctor and if the victim becomes unable to give further statement or dies then such statement should be the basis for drawing FIR without any undue delay. In our considered view it is imperative that in all the serious cases where the victim is injured and his / her statement has been recorded by a Magistrate / Doctor then such statement or further statement of that injured should be recorded as FIR without any delay, in any case within 24 hours of recording of the statement. This alone shall ensure that undue delay is not causing in investigation and shall also subserve the interest of justice.;