JAi PRAKASH SINGH v. THE STATE OF BIHAR ETC & Anr.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 438, 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 149, 302
- Constitution of India art. 21
Judgment
HELD: 1.1 The FIR had been lodged promptly within 0 a period of two hours from the time of incident at midnight. Promptness in filing the FIR gives certain assurance of veracity of the version given by. the informant/complainant. A promptly lodged FIR reflects the first hand account of what has actually happened, and E who was responsible for the offence in question. The FIR in criminal case is a vital and valuable piece of evidence though may not be substantive piece of evidence. The object of insisting upon prompt lodging of the FIR in respect of the commission of an offence is to obtain early information regarding the circumstances in which the crime was committed, the names of actual culprits and the part played by them as well as the names of eye witnesses present at the scene of occurrence. If there is a delay in lodging the FIR, it looses the advantage of spontaneity, danger creeps in of the introduction of G coloured version, exaggerated account or concocted story as a result of large number of consultations/ deliberations. [Paras 11 and 12) [10-B-E] F Thu/ia Kali v. The State of Tamil Nadu AIR 1973 SC 501: H 1972 (3) SCR 622 ; State of Punjab v. Surja Ram AIR 1995 JAi PRAKASH SINGH v. STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. ETC. 3
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.