The Legal Weight of FIRs in Criminal Justice Proceedings

When a crime is reported in India, the very first document that sets the criminal justice machinery in motion is the First Information Report – the FIR. Recorded under Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (which replaced Section 154 of the CrPC), the FIR is the earliest official account of a cognizable offence. But how much weight does it actually carry in court? Can it convict an accused? Can it be used against the person who filed it? These are questions that go to the heart of criminal evidence law – and the answers are more nuanced than most people expect.

The FIR is not substantive evidence – here’s what that means 🔗

The most important principle to understand about the FIR’s evidentiary status is this: an FIR is not substantive evidence of the facts stated in it. This is the established position in Indian law, upheld consistently by the Supreme Court.

Substantive evidence refers to evidence that can directly prove or disprove a fact in issue – evidence a court can rely on to determine guilt or innocence. The FIR does not qualify because of three fundamental reasons. First, the statements in an FIR are not made under oath. Second, they are not made during trial, where the legal standards for evidence recording apply. Third, they are not subject to cross-examination – the primary tool courts use to test the reliability of any statement.

As the Supreme Court noted in Pandurang Chandrakant Mhatre v. State of Maharashtra, an FIR can only be used to impeach the creditworthiness of the informant’s testimony – not to independently prove the facts of the case. This position holds true under the current framework of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), which replaced the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

What the FIR can be used for in court 🔗

Even though an FIR is not substantive evidence, it is far from irrelevant. The law recognises several specific purposes for which it can legitimately be used during trial.

Corroborating the informant’s testimony 🔗

If the person who filed the FIR is later called as a witness during trial, their FIR can be used to support or strengthen their oral testimony. This is governed by Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (now mirrored in Section 160 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023), which allows a prior statement made by a witness – at or about the time of the event – to be used to corroborate their later testimony in court. The closer the FIR is in time to the incident, the stronger its corroborative value. A promptly lodged FIR is considered less likely to be the product of deliberation or fabrication.

Contradicting the informant 🔗

The FIR can also be turned against the informant if their court testimony differs from what they originally stated. Under Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act (Section 148 of the BSA, 2023), a witness may be cross-examined regarding prior written statements – and the FIR qualifies as one. If the defence or prosecution wants to use the FIR to contradict the witness, they must draw the witness’s attention to the specific portions of the FIR being used for that purpose before the writing can be formally proved. This procedural safeguard ensures the witness has an opportunity to explain any discrepancy.

The Supreme Court in Hasib v. State of Bihar confirmed that the FIR can only be used to corroborate or contradict the informant – not any other witness in the case. This is a critical limitation that is often misunderstood.

Other recognised evidentiary uses 🔗

Beyond corroboration and contradiction, courts have recognised several other ways an FIR may be used during proceedings:

• Refreshing the informant’s memory: If the person who filed the FIR cannot recall certain details during testimony, the FIR can be referred to for the purpose of refreshing their memory.
• Impeaching the informant’s credibility: Where there are material inconsistencies between the FIR and the informant’s subsequent statements, this can be used to challenge the overall reliability of that witness.
• Establishing the informant’s conduct: The FIR can serve to show how the informant behaved at the earliest stage of the case – relevant, for instance, to rebut claims that the accused was falsely implicated as an afterthought.
• Identifying the accused, witnesses, and fixing the time and place: Details in an FIR regarding who was present, where the incident occurred, and when it happened are treated as relevant facts under Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act (Section 9 of BSA, 2023).
• Summoning uncharged persons: Where a person is named in the FIR but has not been charge-sheeted, the FIR can be taken into account at the stage of summoning, since it qualifies as evidence at that preliminary stage of proceedings.

When the FIR becomes substantive evidence 🔗

There are specific, well-defined exceptions where an FIR can cross the threshold and be treated as substantive evidence. These exceptions are narrow but important.

The FIR as a dying declaration 🔗

The most significant exception arises when the FIR is lodged by a person who subsequently dies, and the FIR contains a statement about the cause or circumstances of their death. In such cases, the FIR may be admitted as a dying declaration under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (now Section 26(a) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023). A dying declaration carries special evidentiary weight because the law presumes a person facing imminent death has little reason to lie. Once treated as a dying declaration, the FIR can directly support a conviction. This was affirmed in the early case of Kapoor Singh v. Emperor (AIR 1930 Lahore 450), and the principle remains applicable under the new BSA framework.

Injuries inflicted in the presence of a police officer 🔗

Where injuries are caused inside a police station in the presence of a Station House Officer (SHO), and the injured person immediately identifies the perpetrator to that officer, the resulting statement – recorded as an FIR – can be treated as substantive evidence. The immediacy and the presence of a law enforcement witness lend it a level of reliability not present in ordinary FIRs.

Failure of memory by the informant 🔗

If the informant wrote or read the FIR themselves and is later unable to recall the specific details during trial, but confirms that the facts were correctly represented in the FIR at the time it was recorded, the document itself can be relied upon as substantive evidence under the relevant provisions dealing with records of impaired memory.

FIR lodged by the accused 🔗

Where the accused is the one who lodged the FIR – and the contents of that FIR amount to an acknowledgement of facts that go against their interest – it can be treated as an admission under Section 21 of the Indian Evidence Act, giving it substantive evidentiary value.

The critical role of delay in FIR filing 🔗

Courts pay close attention to how promptly an FIR is filed. The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasised that an FIR should be filed without undue delay to prevent fabrication and manipulation of facts. A promptly filed FIR is seen as a reliable, uncoloured account of the incident – one that is less likely to have been shaped by deliberation, consultation, or pressure.

That said, a mere delay in filing does not automatically invalidate the FIR or the prosecution’s case. There is no statutory time limit for filing an FIR under either the CrPC or the BNSS, 2023. However, if the delay is unexplained, courts will scrutinise the FIR’s contents more carefully. A satisfactory explanation for delay – such as the victim’s hospitalisation, fear of the accused, or remoteness of the police station – can preserve the FIR’s evidentiary credibility.

The FIR under the new criminal law framework 🔗

With the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 now in force, the treatment of FIRs in terms of evidentiary value has largely followed the principles established under the old CrPC and Indian Evidence Act. The positional shift is largely structural rather than substantive.

Under the BSA, 2023, an FIR can be used to corroborate the informant’s statement under Section 160 and to contradict them during cross-examination in compliance with Section 148. The dying declaration exception is now codified under Section 26(a) of the BSA. The BNSS has also introduced provisions for zero FIR, electronic recording, and mandatory audio-video documentation of certain statements – changes that may progressively affect how courts assess the reliability and completeness of FIR content in future proceedings.

Limitations that courts must keep in mind 🔗

Several limitations define what an FIR cannot do, and courts are careful to observe these boundaries. The FIR cannot be used to corroborate or contradict witnesses other than the informant – this was confirmed by the Supreme Court in Ram Chandra v. State of Haryana. The contents of the FIR can only be deployed in relation to the person who made the original report.

Moreover, the FIR is only as reliable as the information it contains at the time of filing. Omissions in an FIR – facts that one would expect an honest informant to mention but did not – are treated as significant. Courts have held that the omission of material facts from an FIR is relevant when assessing the veracity of the prosecution’s case. Similarly, an FIR that appears overloaded with details, especially details that would have been difficult to know at the time of filing, may raise suspicion rather than build credibility.

It is also worth noting that a confessional FIR – where the informant is also the accused and the contents amount to a confession made to a police officer – remains inadmissible as a confession under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act (Section 23 of BSA, 2023). The only exception is where information given by an accused in custody distinctly leads to the discovery of a fact, which is then admissible under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act (proviso to Section 23(2) of BSA, 2023).

The FIR as a public document 🔗

One often-overlooked aspect of the FIR is its status as a public document. Being prepared by a public officer in the discharge of official duty, the FIR qualifies as a public document under the Evidence Act, and a certified copy of it is admissible in evidence. This makes the FIR – even if not substantive evidence of its contents – a legally authenticated record whose existence and registration cannot ordinarily be disputed.

This status also means that when the FIR is exhibited during trial, it carries the weight of an official document, and any attempt to deny its registration or alter its contents would expose the offending party to serious legal consequences, including charges of tampering with official records.

What do you think? Given that an FIR is filed at the earliest moment, often in a state of distress, should courts place greater or lesser weight on its contents compared to a witness’s polished courtroom testimony – and how should unexplained inconsistencies between the two be treated? Also, with the BNSS now allowing electronic and audio-video FIR recording, do you think this will significantly strengthen or complicate the FIR’s evidentiary standing in Indian courts?

References

1. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/20063
2. https://blog.ipleaders.in/evidentiary-value-of-fir-2/
3. https://legalwellbeing.in/evidentiary-value-fir/
4. https://www.thelawadvice.com/articles/evidentiary-value-of-a-first-information-report
5. https://indianlegalsolution.com/evidential-value-of-fir/
6. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-4173-the-evidentiary-value-of-first-information-report.html
7. https://www.legalbites.in/amp/bharatiya-Sakshya-adhiniyam//dying-declaration-under-bharatiya-sakshya-adhiniyam-2023-1116247
8. https://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/936/Evidentiary-Value-of-FIR.html
9. https://restthecase.com/knowledge-bank/evidentiary-value-of-fir
10. https://effectivelaws.com/evidentiary-value-of-fir-in-courts/
11. https://www.legalbites.in/bharatiya-nagarik-suraksha-sanhita/evidentiary-value-of-fir-statements-made-to-police-and-magistrates-under-bnss-2023-1158941
12. https://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1578/FIR:-Indian-Evidence-Act,-1872.html