FIR Not Doubtful Or Diluted Merely Because It Was Lodged With Advocate's Help: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that FIR cannot be considered doubtful or diluted merely because it was filed with the assistance of an advocate. A division bench comprising Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary held that legal assistance is available to all at all stages of criminal proceedings and can be availed even at the stage of filing of FIR.“.....merely on the ground that the F.I.R. was written through an assistance of a lawyer, it cannot be assumed that the informant has lodged a false First Information Report against the Appellant. Further, the F.I.R. being lodged with an advocate's assistance does not by itself dilute the credibility of the said F.I.R., the only caveat that the same requires careful scrutiny to ensure that the same is not malicious or motivated. This Court fails to understand that when legal aid is permissible, at every steps of a criminal legal proceedings and even at the stage of lodging an F.I.R., how can there be an embargo on seeking assistance from a private Advocate," the Court said.The Court was dealing with a criminal appeal arising out of a conviction in a homicide case. The informant's mother and sister-in-law were victims of acid attack. Informant had seen the face of the appellant who had previously threatened the informant's brother and had also harassed the sister-in-law's father. While the incident occurred on intervening night of 07/08.05.2014 at about 2:00 AM, the FIR was registered on 09.05.2014 at 11:00 am and the appellant-accused was arrested on 13.05.2014. Eventually, the victims succumbed to their injuries.The Trial Court convicted the appellant under Sections 304, 326-A & 452 I.P.C. and sentenced him under Sections 304 & 326-A I.P.C. for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- and under Section 452 I.P.C. for rigorous imprisonment of 02 years with fine of Rs. 5000/- and to further undergo six months' additional imprisonment in case of default in payment of fine. However, he was acquitted for offence under Section 323 I.P.C. Against his conviction, the appellant approached the High Court. Amongst other things, it was argued that FIR was delayed, and that it was written by a private advocate and was therefore doubtful.The Court observed that the Trial Court had rightly recorded the finding regarding preference being given to the treatment of the injured over lodging of FIR. The Court held that delay in filing the FIR was justified by the complainant as priority had to be given to getting treatment for the injured. It observed that especially in acid attack cases, time is of the essence in getting the right treatment. “Prioritizing the treatment of the injured was more important and natural. In such a situation, the delay in filing the First Information Report alone cannot refute the entire prosecution story. If the testimony of the witnesses presented by the prosecution is credible, this technicality alone does not adversely affect the prosecution.”The Court specifically held that “providing of medical aid is and must be the step before lodging a F.I.R. in all such cases of acid attack and of cases, wherein urgent medical help is required like accident cases etc., and such delay ought to be construed as common and natural.” It held that saving lives of victims takes precedence over lodging of FIR.Thereafter, the Court dealt with the argument of the FIR being filed with the assistance of an advocate. Noting the mental state of the informant whose immediate family was a victim of acid attack, the Court held that the informant was an illiterate person who took help of an advocate. “Merely because in the present case, the said literate person, turned out to be an Advocate, the F.I.R. cannot be thrown out to the wind, especially, when the narration of facts amounts to commission of a cognizable offence. Therefore, this Court finds no cogent grounds for being suspicious to the lodging of the present F.I.R. on assistance of an Advocate.”Rejecting the arguments of the appellant, the Court observed that “F.I.R. is not even a substantive piece of evidence and is merely an instrument by which the criminal machinery is set into motion.”Even on the merits of the case, the Court upheld the judgment of the Trial Court and dismissed the appeal. Case Title: Jagdamba Harijan Versus State of U.P. 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 102Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 102Click Here To Read/Download Order

FIR Not Doubtful Or Diluted Merely Because It Was Lodged With Advocate's Help: Allahabad High Court

Upasna Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

FIR Not Doubtful Or Diluted Merely Because It Was Lodged With Advocate's Help: Allahabad High Court

Upasna Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers