mehnatDelays in FIRs and delays because of delayed FIRs
Top of PageThe subject of delays in criminal proceedings is interesting not only for litigants and lawyers but for the whole country. Here some aspects of such delays are explained in brief.
Is it possible that an FIR is delayed in spite of timely complaint?
Top of PageThere is a common saying that anything is possible in the great country of India. Delay of FIR in spite of timely complaint is a very small thing, and history has witnessed that such small things are very common in our country.
There can be no greater example of this sorry fact than the late registration of FIRs after the mass murder of Sikhs in Delhi and a few other cities in the days after Indira Gandhi's assassination. The globally known and published offences took place in October and November 1984 during Rajiv Gandhi's first few days as PM, but FIRs were registered in dozens of cases even as late as 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1993, [5] after he had passed away in similarly tragic circumstances. If this was not bad enough, all the FIRs related to murders of Sikhs in Kanpur the days after and including 31st October 1984 were destroyed in course of time by Uttar Pradesh Police [6] staff 'working' in Kanpur.
Is police legally bound to accept late complaints? (Statute of Limitations (criminal law))
Top of PageThe statute of limitations is that law in any country which declares the number of years which may be allowed to expire (between the date of occurrence of the said crime and the date of submission of a complaint related to that crime) before admitting a complaint for the purpose of registration of an FIR in that particular country is rendered legally impossible. In India, section 468 of CrPC is the law in this regard, insofar as criminal law is concerned [7][8]. According to this section, the limitation period for any offence which is punishable by a fine only is six months, that for any offence which is punishable by a prison term up to one year is one year, and that for any offence which is punishable by a prison term from one to three years is three years.
CrPC Section 468 – Bar to taking cognizance after lapse of the period of limitationTop of Page
(source: devgan.in)
(1) Except as otherwise provided elsewhere in this Code, no Court, shall take cognizance of an offence of the category specified in Sub-Section (2), after the expiry of the period of limitation.
(2) The period of limitation shall be–
(a) Six months, if the offence is punishable with fine only;
(b) One year, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year;
(c) Three years, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year but not exceeding three years.
(3) [1]For the purposes of this section, the period of limitation, in relation to offences which may be tried together, shall be determined with reference to the offence which is punishable with the more severe punishment or, as the case may be, the most severe punishment.
Footnote to CrPC Section 468Top of Page
(source: devgan.in)
1) Provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to certain economic offences, see the Economic Offences (Inapplicability of Limitation) Act, 1974 (12 of 1974 ), section 2 and Schedule.
Since section 498a is punishable by a maximum of 3 years, any complaint relating to dowry harassment or dowry cruelty must be reported within three years of the last claimed incident. The same is true of section 406, which relates to criminal breach of trust. Section 34 is punishable by one year in prison in the worst case, but this period of one year does not affect any complaint made under sections 498a/406/34 because of the provision contained in CrPC Section 468(3) (reproduced hereinabove).
Are delayed F.I.Rs taken seriously by courts? (Warrant cases, Serious crimes, Heinous crimes)
Top of PageIn many crimes a delayed FIR is not taken seriously by the courts. In many other crimes an FIR is accepted as a weighty document regardless of any delay.
In serious crimes (crimes which may be punished by 7 or more years in prison) delays are condoned more easily than in warrant cases (cases relating to crimes which may be punished by 2 or more years in prison). In heinous crimes (crimes which may be punished by life in prison or death) any delay in registering an FIR is immaterial.
Insofar as dowry cases are concerned, courts tend to take delayed complaints under IPC section 498a, IPC section 406, and IPC section 34 with a pinch of salt. An FIR is compulsory upon receipt of complaint –with a small caveat in the case of 498a– since all these sections pertain to cognisable crimes. In cases involving Section 498a of the CrPC the caveat established by law is that there is a CAW cell procedure which the complainant and the prime accused have to undergo before a decision is taken about forwarding the complaint to the relevant police station.
References:
Top of Page5)Gyanesh, K.; Notice by S.I.T. for 1984 riots; Ministry of Home Affairs; New Delhi; 23rd February, 2017; Retrieved on 08th May 2021
6)Nath, D.; RTI query reveals cops destroyed FIRs of 1984 riots; The Hindu; Chennai; 13th April, 2015; Retrieved on 08th May 2021
7)Section 468 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Indiankanoon.org; Delhi; Undated; Retrieved on 09th May 2021
8)CrPC Section 468 - Bar to taking cognizance after lapse of the period of limitation | Devgan.in; devgan.in; Delhi; Undated; Retrieved on 08th May 2021