In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court India has ruled that interpolations and changing the time of commission in a First Information Report (FIR) will result in the benefit of doubt being given to the accused and ultimately lead to acquittal. The Court emphasized that altering the time of a crime to create a false impression undermines the evidentiary value of the FIR.
The authenticity of an FIR, especially in criminal cases such as murder, is crucial in assessing the evidence presented during the trial. Any infirmities in the FIR raise doubts about its authenticity, granting the accused the benefit of doubt.
The court said ““Infirmities such as ante-timing of the FIR loses its evidentiary value… entitles the accused to be given the benefit of doubt… It is worth mentioning that an FIR in a criminal case, and particularly in a murder case, is a vital and a valuable piece of evidence especially for the purpose of appreciating the evidence adduced at the trial. It is for this reason that infirmities, if any, in the FIR cast a doubt on its authenticity.”
This legal principle was established in the context of a 27-year-old murder case from Mangaluru, where a man and his father were acquitted by the Court. It was revealed that the time of the alleged crime in the FIR had been changed through overwriting, shifting it from 1.50 p.m. to 9 a.m. The Court recognized the interpolation and ante-timing in the FIR, noting that the complaint was originally lodged at 1.50 p.m. on August 4, 1995. The appellants consistently maintained their innocence, asserting that they were falsely implicated due to being newcomers to the village.
Furthermore, the prosecution’s case against the father-son duo faced additional challenges, including an unexplained delay in submitting the FIR to the local court and a lack of credible eyewitnesses. As a result, the Court acquitted the accused based on the principle that the infirmities in the FIR, such as interpolations and ante-timing, undermined its evidentiary value and raised doubts about its authenticity.
This landmark ruling reaffirms the importance of maintaining the integrity of FIRs and highlights the significance of accurate and reliable evidence in criminal cases.
