Recently the Karnataka High Court held that FIR is not an encyclopedia. Hence, it need not contain every detail but what is required is reporting of the crime to the police.
Facts of the Case
An FIR was registered against the Petitioner for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
On 30.11.2018 the informant who is the sister of the deceased (Keshava) reported the commission of an offence to the police.
She reported to the police that on that day at about 9:15 P.m., her brother-in-law namely Govindaraju came near her house and informed her that Keshava had been assaulted near Hennur Bande.
Thereafter, she went to the place and found the dead body of her brother. The informant also got to know that the death of Keshava was caused by 3-4 persons assaulting him with deadly weapons.
During the investigation, it was revealed that the petitioner and other accused who are juveniles are involved in the commission of the crime. Therefore, the petitioner filed this bail application for being enlarged on bail.
The contentions of the petitioner:
The petitioner contended that the complaint or First Information Report did not reveal the name of any assailants.
He further contended that Kiran and Sharath were not believable to be eyewitnesses as they did not report the incident to the police when nothing had prevented them from doing so.
He also contended that there did not exist any prima facie case against him. Therefore, he should be entitled to bail.
The contentions of the Respondent:
The respondent contended that only, eyewitnesses did not report the incident cannot be a ground for not making a prima facie case against the petitioner.
Furthermore, a knife had been recovered at the instance of the petitioner and these events established the existence of a prima facie case against the petitioner if put together.
Observation of the Court:
The Court observed that “First information need not be an encyclopedia. It need not to contain every detail. What is required is the reporting of the crime to the police.
If the sister of the deceased gave information about the killing of her brother without mentioning the name of the assailants, it cannot be a ground for disbelieving the FIR.
If Kiran and Sharath who are shown as eyewitnesses did not inform the police about the incident, their statement cannot be disbelieved at this stage.
They may be subjected to cross-examination in the course of the trial to test their demeanour.”
Accordingly, the Court rejected the bail application, based on the production of the knife at the instance of the petitioner, which was said to have been used for assaulting the deceased.
Title of the Case: Arjun vs State of Karnataka
Date of the order: 23rd October 2020
Coram: Mr. Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar
Appearances: Shri Nikhil D Kamath advocate for the petitioner,
Shri Rohit B.J., HGCP for the respondent.
Story by Rohit Mathur-Intern