Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Unbelievability of FIR at the time of incident - Several sources highlight that FIRs lodged shortly after the incident are often considered more credible, while delayed FIRs or those filed under questionable circumstances are viewed skeptically. For instance, ["Bhawani Singh VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"] states, The contents of the F.I.R. are absolutely false, fabricated and unbelievable, suggesting skepticism about the incident's occurrence as described in the FIR. Similarly, ["Ambareesh Jonnavittula vs The State of Telangana - Telangana"] notes that the manner in which the incident took place is doubtful, indicating doubts about the credibility of the FIR based on the evidence.
Discrepancies and false reporting - Multiple cases demonstrate that FIRs may be based on exaggerated, fabricated, or untrue accounts. ["Surya VS State by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Villupuram District - Madras"] mentions that the de facto complainant had exaggerated the incident to wreak vengeance and that no independent witness of the incident has been produced, which undermines the credibility of the FIR. ["Vijayamma, w/o. Kumaran VS State Of Kerala - Kerala"] emphasizes that FIR is the most immediate and first version of the incident and has great value in ascertaining the truth, but also notes that discrepancies can undermine its reliability.
Timing and delay issues - Several judgments point out that delays in lodging FIRs can cast doubt on the incident's occurrence or the veracity of the claims. ["NEMI CHAND @ NEMA RAM and ORS vs STATE and ANR - Rajasthan"] refers to a case where there was no any untoward incident reported as well as considering the nature of injury, which is simple, implying that the incident may be untrue or exaggerated, especially given the long passage of time (18 years) since the incident. Furthermore, ["Bachchu @ Bachchu Singh VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"] discusses a case where FIR of the incident was also lodged by Babu prior to us at Police Station, suggesting multiple reports or delays.
Specific case insights - In many instances, courts have observed that the incident described in the FIR appears unbelievable or inconsistent with other evidence. ["NEMI CHAND @ NEMA RAM and ORS vs STATE and ANR - Rajasthan"]_2020_DHC_1039 states, The said statement is ex-facie unbelievable and is belied by the telephonic conversation, indicating that the FIR's account was contradicted by other evidence. Similarly, ["NEMI CHAND @ NEMA RAM and ORS vs STATE and ANR - Rajasthan"] notes that it appears to be a chance meeting and questions whether the alleged injury was intentionally caused, casting doubt on the incident's credibility.
Analysis and Conclusion:The collected judgments consistently suggest that when an FIR is filed immediately after an incident, especially with corroborative evidence, it is deemed more credible. Conversely, FIRs filed after long delays, with inconsistencies, or based on exaggerated or uncorroborated accounts are often viewed skeptically by courts. The main point is that the believability of an incident described in an FIR under Section 324 IPC depends heavily on the timing, consistency, and supporting evidence; uncorroborated or suspicious FIRs are likely to be considered unbelievable, particularly if the incident itself appears fabricated or exaggerated ["Bhawani Singh VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"] ["NEMI CHAND @ NEMA RAM and ORS vs STATE and ANR - Rajasthan"].
In criminal law, the First Information Report (FIR) serves as the cornerstone of any prosecution. But what happens under IPC Section 324—voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means—if the FIR filed by the complainant at the claimed time of the incident itself appears unbelievable? This question often arises in disputes involving assaults, where allegations of injuries hinge on the initial complaint. Courts have repeatedly emphasized that a shaky FIR can cast serious doubt on the whole prosecution story, potentially leading to acquittal or quashing of proceedings.
This blog delves into the legal principles, key judgments, and practical implications, drawing from established case law. While this provides general insights, consult a legal expert for advice tailored to your situation.
IPC Section 324 punishes voluntarily causing hurt using instruments like knives, sticks, or acids that are likely to cause death. It carries imprisonment up to three years, or more if grievous hurt results. Proving the offence requires establishing the incident, the weapon, intent, and injuries—often starting with the FIR.
The query at hand: IPC section 324, if the fir filed at the time the complainant claim, the incident itself is unbelievable. Courts treat this scenario seriously, as an unreliable FIR erodes the foundation of the case.
The FIR is the first official record of the crime, typically lodged promptly. Its truthfulness influences the entire prosecution. If unbelievable—due to delays, contradictions, or fabrication—it undermines allegations of injuries and the offence itself. Courts have held that such flaws can render the prosecution case suspect, leading to acquittal. Ritu Tomar VS State of U. P. - 2023 3 Supreme 699
Key points include:- Discrepancies and delays: Contradictions between FIR and evidence, or unexplained delays, raise red flags. National High School, Madras VS Educational Appellate Tribunal - 1991 0 Supreme(SC) 515- Untrustworthy foundation: An FIR that appears motivated or false questions the incident's veracity. Hamida VS Rashid @ Rasheed - 2007 4 Supreme 113- Ground for acquittal: Without credible FIR support, courts may discard testimony and evidence. Ritu Tomar VS State of U. P. - 2023 3 Supreme 699
As one ruling notes, discrepancies, delays, and untrustworthy evidence undermine the prosecution's case, including injuries claimed under Section 324 IPC. National High School, Madras VS Educational Appellate Tribunal - 1991 0 Supreme(SC) 515
In a key observation, courts have quashed proceedings where the FIR projected a false incident and was untrustworthy. Ritu Tomar VS State of U. P. - 2023 3 Supreme 699 Similarly, delayed FIRs with doubtful credibility led to High Court orders being set aside, suggesting fabrication. Hamida VS Rashid @ Rasheed - 2007 4 Supreme 113
Delays aren't fatal if explained, but unexplained ones invite suspicion. In one appeal under Section 324 IPC, the court analyzed FIR delay due to vehicle unavailability but upheld conviction based on medical evidence and testimonies. Somaji Bawaji Thakore VS State of Gujarat - 2024 Supreme(Guj) 997 However, in another, inordinate delay exceeding three years under Section 468 Cr.P.C. led to quashing: no explanation for the delay was provided, inferring possible malicious intent behind the FIR. Jatinder Kumar VS State of Punjab - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 2658Jatinder Kumar VS State of Punjab - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1554
Non-production of initial reports like Dehati Nalishi (village report) makes the prosecution suspicious. If any Dehati Nalishi has been recorded on the spot but not produced before the Court then it can be presumed that defence story was mentioned in suppressed Dehati Nalishi. Badam Singh VS State of M. P. - 2013 Supreme(MP) 325 This led to acquittal in a case involving Sections 302/34, 326/34, and 324/34 IPC.
Witness conduct also matters. In a bail application, it was argued: it is unbelievable that when a complaint is being lodged by cousin of the petitioner... would not take the name of the petitioner. Girdhari Ram VS State of Rajasthan - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 333 Bail was granted, highlighting credibility gaps.
Courts discard evidence mixed with falsehood: the prosecution's evidence was so mixed with falsehood and exaggeration that it was not feasible to separate the truth from the falsehood. Mange Ram VS State Of Haryana - 2020 Supreme(P&H) 1717 Cross-FIRs often indicate counter-blasts, as in a case where the FIR was deemed a response to the accused's prior complaint. Somaji Bawaji Thakore VS State of Gujarat - 2024 Supreme(Guj) 997
In quashing petitions, minor altercations misrepresented in FIRs were exposed during investigation: during the course of investigation it transpired that a minor altercation took place... and no such incident occurred as alleged in the FIR. Jatinder Kumar VS State of Punjab - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 2658Jatinder Kumar VS State of Punjab - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1554
Under Section 324, injuries must be corroborated medically. An unbelievable FIR makes even medical reports suspect if inconsistent. Courts may acquit if:- Injuries don't match FIR narrative.- No independent witnesses.- Eyewitnesses fail to act credibly, e.g., their conduct at the time of the alleged incident is equally unbelievable. State Of Uttarakhand VS Mohan Ram - 2021 Supreme(UK) 75
However, reliable injured witness testimony can prevail, as in a conviction upheld with medical corroboration despite challenges. Dallu VS State of M. P. - 2020 Supreme(MP) 1228
Not all imperfections sink a case:- Corroborative evidence: Strong medical reports, consistent eyewitnesses, or recoveries can salvage it. Somaji Bawaji Thakore VS State of Gujarat - 2024 Supreme(Guj) 997- Plausible explanations: Delays due to medical treatment or logistics may be excused. NEMI CHAND @ NEMA RAM and ORS vs STATE and ANR- Overall circumstances: Courts weigh the totality, sometimes altering sentences post-conviction. Dallu VS State of M. P. - 2020 Supreme(MP) 1228SITA RAM VS STATE OF U. P. - 2018 Supreme(All) 1013
In one instance, despite FIR issues, conviction stood on injury proof: injury sustained by injured by weapons attributed to accused fully corroborates prosecution version. SITA RAM VS STATE OF U. P. - 2018 Supreme(All) 1013
For accused facing Section 324 charges:- Scrutinize the FIR: Highlight delays, contradictions, or motives early.- Seek quashing under Cr.P.C. 482: If time-barred or malicious. Jatinder Kumar VS State of Punjab - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 2658- Gather counter-evidence: Cross-FIRs, alibis, or inconsistent statements.
For complainants:- Lodge FIR promptly with accurate details.- Ensure medical exams align with claims.
Investigators should probe delays thoroughly to avoid abuse.
An unbelievable FIR in IPC Section 324 cases often signals a fabricated incident, justifying doubt on injuries and leading to acquittal or quashing. Courts prioritize justice over harassment: the purpose of the registration of FIR must align with the pursuit of justice and not serve as a harassment tool against the innocent. Jatinder Kumar VS State of Punjab - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 2658
Key Takeaways:- FIR credibility is paramount; flaws can collapse the case. Ritu Tomar VS State of U. P. - 2023 3 Supreme 699- Delays and contradictions invite scrutiny. National High School, Madras VS Educational Appellate Tribunal - 1991 0 Supreme(SC) 515Hamida VS Rashid @ Rasheed - 2007 4 Supreme 113- Corroboration saves weak FIRs, but not always.- Benefit of doubt favors the accused in gray areas.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws evolve, and outcomes depend on specific facts. Always seek professional counsel.
References:- Ritu Tomar VS State of U. P. - 2023 3 Supreme 699, National High School, Madras VS Educational Appellate Tribunal - 1991 0 Supreme(SC) 515, Hamida VS Rashid @ Rasheed - 2007 4 Supreme 113, Somaji Bawaji Thakore VS State of Gujarat - 2024 Supreme(Guj) 997, Jatinder Kumar VS State of Punjab - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 2658, Jatinder Kumar VS State of Punjab - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1554, Badam Singh VS State of M. P. - 2013 Supreme(MP) 325, State Of Uttarakhand VS Mohan Ram - 2021 Supreme(UK) 75, Mange Ram VS State Of Haryana - 2020 Supreme(P&H) 1717, Girdhari Ram VS State of Rajasthan - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 333, SITA RAM VS STATE OF U. P. - 2018 Supreme(All) 1013, Dallu VS State of M. P. - 2020 Supreme(MP) 1228, NEMI CHAND @ NEMA RAM and ORS vs STATE and ANR
#IPC324, #FIRCredibility, #CriminalLawIndia
It is also argued that for the incident took place on 28.6.2013, FIR was negligence on the part of the doctors of the private hospital but at the time
the present appellant to the Govaji would certainly attract the provision of Section-324 of the IPC. ... Sweta Lodha for the appellant-original accused no. 1 submits that the present FIR and the prosecution is the counter-blast of the FIR filed by the appellant side. ... Learned APP submits that from the explanation offered for delay in FIR by the complainant in his evidence at Exh.21, that due to non-availability of the vehicle, the time was taken t....
Seeking quashing of FIR No.113 dated 12.5.2016, under Section 324 , 323, 148, 149 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Faridkot, District Faridkot and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR qua the petitioners. ... He further submits that during the course of investigation it transpired that a minor altercation took place between the complainant and petitioner No.1 on the issue of rent and no such incident occurred as alleged in the FIR and the present #HL_STA....
The record discloses that based on the contents of the complaint, FIR was registered for the offence under Section 323 IPC. The recitals of the charge sheet point out causing of simple injuries, but, however, the charge sheet is filed under Section 324 IPC. ... 324 IPC and hence, prayed to dismiss the petition. ... The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that Section 324 IPC does not get attracted which is falsel....
He further submits that during the course of investigation it transpired that a minor altercation took place between the complainant and petitioner No.1 on the issue of rent and no such incident occurred as alleged in the FIR and the present FIR was got registered by respondent No.2 with ulterior motives ... Seeking quashing of FIR No.113 dated 12.5.2016, under Section 324 , 323, 148, 149 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Faridkot, District Faridkot and all subsequent proc....
This incident was not reported at Police Station by the complainant. ... 450 IPC, five years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.1000/- under section 304/34 IPC, four years RI along with fine of Rs.1000/- under section 326/34 and two years RI under section 324/34 IPC separately for each accused. ... In this way, two set of facts came before us firstly, complainant party directly went to police station and lodged FIR (Ex.P-5) and, secondly, po....
was fallen down in some pointed article and sustained injuries or at the time of incident he was intoxicated. ... This criminal appeal u/s 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 30.04.1998 passed by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Session Trial No. 544/1995 convicting the appellant for the offence punishable u/s 324 IPC and sentenced to undergo ... An FIR was registered on the same day for the offence punishable under ....
It is well settled that FIR is the most immediate and first version of the incident and has great value in ascertaining the truth and that a prompt FIR diminishes the chances of an informant being tutored and the false implication of the accused. 16. ... of the case, invoked Section 4 of the Act and the appellants are challenging their conviction under Section 324 IPC and the revision petitioner is challenging the release of the accused persons under Section 4 of the Act, instead of imposing appropriate....
This application for bail has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with FIR No. 238/2011, Police Station Osia, District Jodhpur, for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 324 & 302 IPC. ... 2. ... Arguing the bail application learned counsel for the petitioner contended that it is unbelievable that when a complaint is being lodged by cousin of the petitioner, who claims to be present at the spot, would not take the name of the petitioner, if he was really available....
The contents of the F.I.R. are absolutely false, fabricated and unbelievable. The evidence on record does not support the prosecution story. The manner in which the incident took place is doubtful. ... The maximum sentence provided in the Indian Penal Code for the offence under Section 324 IPC is 03 year imprisonment. ... No independent witness of the incident has been produced. Lastly, learned counsel for the appellants stated that the case of the prosecution would n....
Moreover, their conduct at the time of the alleged incident is equally unbelievable. Yet, four of them neither tried to over-power Mohan Ram, nor tried to separate him from Bharat Lal. For, these four witnesses would have the Court believed that as soon as they saw Mohan Ram slapping Bharat Lal, they rushed to his rescue.
Regarding that incident FIR No. 134 dated 28.03.2001 u/s 323, 324/ 34 IPC had been got registered by Om Parkash against the complainant party. The Ld. Trial Court concluded that there appeared to be much exaggeration and concoction in the version of the prosecution and the established facts contradicted it. But the Ld. Trial Court concluded that the occurrence of 01.04.2001 in which two persons from the side of the complainant died and one sustained injuries did not happen in the manner as depicted by the prosecution.
As per the guest register maintained by hotel, only one person stayed at the room and no other person visited over there. The said statement is ex-facie unbelievable and is belied by the telephonic conversation between complainant and petitioner for 324 Seconds at 17:05:24. In her supplementary statement dated 20.05.2014, complainant has stated that on 12.08.2013, she reached hotel Oodles at 4 PM and remained there till 7:30 PM. Thus, it is unbelievable that two persons sitting together at the same place would talk to each other over telephone for 5 ½ minutes.
7. On the FIR lodged by the petitioner/complainant, charge-sheet was filed under sections 294, 323, 323/34, 324, 324/34 and 506-II of the IPC against the respondents at Police Station Pathrota, District Hoshangabad. It is pertinent to note that in the impugned order itself, the learned trial Court mentioned that earlier the Court had granted leave in favour of the counsel for the petitioner to assist the prosecution on behalf of the complainant.
The three injured persons were sent to Hospital for their examination. On their raising alarm, other villagers reached there and challenged the accused whereby the accused fled away. The First Information Report of the incident was lodged at 10.55 p.m. and the case was registered under Section 324 IPC. The Doctor noted the injuries on the persons of the injured, whose duration were fresh, the injuries noted by the Doctor, are reproduced below :
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
