Chapter 12 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 deals with information to the police and their power to investigation. It has been comprised in section 154 to 176 of the code.

Information

Under this code three kinds of information have been provided –

1. information relating to commission of cognizable offence
2. Information relating to commission of non cognizable offence
3. An information received by any person other than police officer

the above mentioned first two information shall always be given to the police officer while third information shall always be given to Magistrate having jurisdiction over the case.

With the first to information criminal law will be set in motion while by third information criminal proceeding will be initiated by taking cognizance of the offence.

Criminal law set in motion

there are two modes in the code which prescribes the procedure for setting the criminal law in motion.

• By an information to the police under section 154 and 155.
• By filing a complaint to the mustard. (2(d)), Section 190(1)(a)

Who may set the criminal law in motion ?

Any person may set the criminal law in motion. Such person aggrieved or not. However there is exception to the general rule. Section 195 to 199 provides that only those persons may set the criminal law in motion who is actually aggrieved by the offence.

Information relating to commission of cognizable offence

Section 154 of The Criminal Procedure Code deals with information relating to commission of cognizable offence. The information given to police officer relating to commission of an cognizable offence is known as FIR. It is known as lodging of FIR. FIR means first information report.

The code provides two modes by which FIR may be lodged –

• without the assistant of the court under Section 154.
• with the assistant of the Court under section 156 clause 3.

First mode is statutory provision while second mode is the creation of judiciary.

Lodging of FIR

According to Section 154, every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally to an officer in charge of a police station shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the state government may described in this behalf.

According to the provision inserted by the criminal law amendment act 2013, if the information is given by the women against whom and offence under section 326A, 326B, Section 354, Section 375, Section 376, Section 376A, Section 376B, Section 376C, Section 376D, Section 376E and section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been committed then such information shall be recorded, as for as possible, by a woman police officer.

Further proviso provides if the person against whom an offence under Section 354 Section 354A, Section 354 B, Section 354 C, Section 354 D, Section 376, Section 376A, Section 376B, Section 376C, section 376D, Section 376E, Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been committed is it temporary or permanently mentally are physically disabled then such information shall be recorded by the police officer at the residence of the person seeking to report such offence or at the convenient place of such person’s choice in the presence of an interpreter or special educator as the case may be.

According to Section 154 information relating to commission of cognizable offence may be lodged at any police station and it is the duty of the officer in charge of police station to record search information.

The Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana versus Chaudhari Bhajan Lal has held that officer in charge of police station cannot refuse to record on this ground that matter is beyond the local limits of the police station.

but in non cognizable cases boundry limits of police station shall be taken into consideration and information relating to non cognizable offence must be recorded to that police station within which local limits of offence was committed.

Refusal for lodging of FIR

Any person aggrieved by the refusal of lodging of FIR he may avail any of the following remedy –

• He may send a registered letter to superintendent of police under section154 clause 3.
• He may file a complaint to Magistrate concern.
• He may make an application to Magistrate concern.

According to clause 3 of section 154, if an officer in charge of police station refuses to record the information of commission of a cognizable offence, any person aggrieved by such refusal may send the substance of such information in writing and by post to the superintendent of police. If the superintendent of police is satisfied and such information discloses the commission of cognizable offence he may investigate the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him.

Utility of FIR

Supreme Court in the case of Habib versus State of Bihar has observed that FIR is not a substantive evidence and therefore merely on the basis of FIR accused cannot be convicted. FIR is not treated as a substantive evidence because it is not given on oath. It is not given before the court and its velocity cannot be proved.

However it may be used for the following purpose –

• FIR may be used for contradicting the witness under section 145 of the Indian evidence Act
• FIR may be used for coroborating the witness under section 157 of the Indian evidence Act
• it may be used for cross examination the informant.

Information relating to non cognizable offence

According to Section 155 when an information is given to an officer in charge of police station of the commission of non cognizable offence he shall enter the substance of the information in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf and refer the informant to the Magistrate.

according to Section 155(1) such information shall be given to that police station within whose local limit offence has been committed. (But in case of cognizable offence there is no such limitation)

According to Section 155 (1) informant shall be referred to the Magistrate for obtaining the order of Investigation of the case.

According to Section 155 (2) police officer shall not investigate a non cognizable case without the order of a magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial.

If the Magistrate not empowered by law to order the police under section 155 for the investigation of non cognizable case, such proceedings shall not be set aside. These proceedings are irregularities which do not vitiate proceeding.

According to Section 155(3) after obtaining an order of investigation the police officer shall exercise the same powers as conferredfor the investigation of cognizable offence but he can’t arrest without warrant.

Section 155(4) provides where a case relates to two or more offences of which at least one is cognizable, the case shall be deemed to be a cognizable case, notwithstanding that other offences are non cognizable.