CRIMINAL LAWYER: IN FIR AND STATEMENT UNDER SEC 161 CrPC THE NAME OF ACCUSED NOT DISCLOSED - ACCUSED ACQUITTED IN MURDER (SEC 302 IPC).

Supreme Court Of India

S.A Bobde (J) & S.K. Kaul (J)

The FIR is not encyclopaedia of offence. But on the other hand it has lot of relevance in criminal trial. As it is believed the maker of complaint discloses the true information, which is just recorded after crime, and there is hardly any time for consultation or for false implications, in the case the FIR is spontaneous, without wastage of any time.

The present case titled as " Peer Singh VS State of MP" reached as an appeal by the accused before the Supreme Court against the Judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court which convicted the accused/ appellant.

The FIR, which is first hand information of crime, and statement recorded subsequently by police u/s 161 CrPC has lot of relevance, while looking at the case of the informant/ complainant.

In the present case the appellant name was neither disclosed by the complainant in FIR or subsequently in the statement which was recorded by the police under Sec 161 CrPC - when the appellant and the informant/ complainant were native of same village. It is not possible that the accused who is known to the complainant  and resident of same village if involved in the commission of heinous offence - his name is not disclosed by the complainant either in FIR or statement recorded thereafter by police. That raised serious doubts to the case of the complainant qua the appellant involved in the offence.

In the present case there was concurrent finding of the trial court and High Court regarding conviction of the appellant for murder.

In view of the same glaring discrepancy, the SC acquitted the accused and set him free after setting aside concurrent findings of courts below.