 It's again gone down. Yeah, not sure. Good evening, everyone. Amongst us, we have Dr. Shajna Elsa Filp, who is an associate professor in CMR University at the Legal Studies. We have taken various sessions with her and we have seen that she speaks extempore and carries the sessions. And such a player that people are connected with that, not only during the session, but also after the session. As usual, we also take live questions from the YouTube, Facebook, or whatever is posted on the chat. Today's role of development of law in respect of the first information report by the courts, et cetera. So I would request her, since it's a weekend, that straight away, over to you. Thank you so much, Vikas. A wonderful evening to one and all of you. Yes, I'm here once again with beyond law, collaborated with beyond law. So just to share with you a few things regarding, a few points or legal points regarding, the first information report that has been commonly spoken about. Now, I have not prepared a speech wherein I can come and just dictate to you what an FIR is. But however, I have a certain concept understanding that majority of the viewers are students. So I have kept in mind a few points which I would want to clarify in the course of my presentation. I would also like to answer a few questions for which I can get questions. So a few questions which I have already gotten, I would try to answer them in the course of my presentation. However, you still have any doubts regarding them or clarification, we can go ahead and I can get that clarified. That should not be a problem. So before moving on, so let's move into the course of it. Let's take up this concept of FIR, first information report. It's a very common term which in and around so many of us have used. We have all spoken about it. We have discussed about it. At least in colleges, they have spoken about what do you mean by an FIR and stuff. We know that this has been a discussion and I'm sure there have been many legal luminaries which have spoken about this to you people. So I'm sure that all of you will be having a fair idea on what this FIR would be. Obviously the Code of Criminal Procedure. I can start with section 154. Now, even before moving on to it, okay, even before moving on with the concept and the legality of FIR and stuff, I would like to just break down a few changes on slide history regarding how this 154 has been brought in. Now, when you look at the various amendments which have happened, we have the Criminal Procedure Code 1861, we have the Criminal Procedure Code 1872, we have the Criminal Procedure Code 1882 and 1898 beyond the 1973 one. The 1955 and the 1973. In 1951, there were not much changes with regard to the X-ray approaches. That's why we're not mentioning it here. But after 1898, we also have the 1960s approaches changes at the 2013 amendment, all right? Now, 2013 amendment are not the changes because after the Nirbaya case has come up and they understood that there's been opens against women have increased in all these situations, there were a few changes which is the law of profit. Let's go with 1861 and 1872. Now, when you analyze 1861 and 1872, so why I am doing this is for us to understand what has been, how to evolve the, what do you call it, the legal, how we understand the concept of FIR as enumerated in the legislation, as enumerated in the court. So that is what I am attempting to tell. Now, why have this topic role of courts coming? Just to simply reason that there are discrepancies regarding interpretation of 154. There are discrepancies regarding the way the courts have taken up a few cases when it came to 154. Simple as that. So to understand that, to understand how you should come to a consensus in interpreting 154 is why I thought I would just take you to the legislative history of this court. Now, 1861 and 1872 spoke about, in fact, 1861, it was called a per section 139, which said that every complaint or information, they're not much of a difference. 1872 said remote information and said every complaint. So this change happened, every complaint, then every information and complaint. Then when it came to 1882, it's every information-related commission of cognizable events. So if you know, 1861 and 1872 never spoke about something called cognizable events or non-cognizable events. It only spoke about the information on a complaint. The next year when it came to the strategy ticket, it spoke about every complaint. So this was the concern. Then 1882 is when specifically tried to speak about cognizable events and information can be oral or interacting. So the change of the cognizable events came up in 1882 and 1898 also carried it forward. So 1882 and 1898 are the type when an event happened much before. We have not spoken about any other events, just about these events. Well, you know, there's something was fine. I mean, wherein again included something called the cognizable events. Then we have the 1970s. 1973 is almost the same that we see right now, except for 2013 when a couple of provisors were added. So as it stands today, if you analyze the provisions of the language of 115, it is very clear. What is it? Information, every information relating to the commission of cognizable events. How do you give it? Either oral or interacting to a person charged in the police station. Now, if it doesn't take it, we have clauses which says that the matter can be taken up further to the superintendent of police who will look into the matter later. So that comes later. Now, there are a few changes. With regard to punishments also, which I will get back to you on that. Let's finish this first. So then what kind of, so the first thing is that we need to understand is what kind of an interpretation do you give? What kind of an interpretation can we give to this concept called S. V. R.? Very blatantly, the courts have stated that when there is no doubt with regard to the language of the statute or the legislation, you go with literal interpretation. So if you go with literal interpretation, it's the most lost chance today. Section 154 encourages you to read it as the language gives it. We need not give any interpretation. We need not give any, we need not find out what would have been the intention in the section was brought because on the face of it, there are no discrepancies and the law is very clear and we can give it a literal interpretation. And if we give a literal interpretation, now moving on, if we give a literal interpretation, all it says is you need to have an information with regard to a cognizable office. And if the police officer, I think that was also one of those questions which was asked in the set of the questions that were given to me. What happens if the police doesn't listen to it? Yeah, one could just be for the state. Just because one could just be for the state that doesn't be that the police speaks for it, what appear? There are so many cases where the police is not filed in a fair, we have enough in both cases. Rather, what the vote says is it is equal. Cases where the fair is filed and the cases where the fair is not filed are almost equal in number. So what happens? So understanding that this is not the situation, this is not the right vote, is when 166A of the Indian penal code was added in 2013, which very specifically code, whoever being a public servant. Okay, now if you are disobeying any direction of the law which prohibits them from requiring the attendance of any place of any person for the purpose of investigation. So if you're disobeying any direction of the law and prohibits them from requiring the attendance at any place of any person, then it is wrong. If you're knowing it is so being which is prejudice to any person, it is wrong. The third one is fails to record any information. Now, before these, so that means fails, even despite of this, okay, fails to record any information given to him under 164 clause one, even it is an offense. So it is now become penalized under 166A of the Indian penal code. So thereby it becomes mandatory because you shall not be less than six months but which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to find the punishment that has been given under the 2013 impasse. I can't deal with all these. So even at this stage, and we all know the landmark decision of Lalitha Kumari, until then, there was a lot of dissipation to do after this FAR, or before filing an FAR, should there be an inquiry, should there be an investigation and ask them to come up, why especially because in regard to what, in regard to that investigation, what some of which is cognizable, second, whether there is something that you can get a case about, so where are we? We try to analyze the legislative history. We came through the 1867, 72, 1881 and 19 quad statutes and we analyze how that developed where we understood that it is in the last two definitions and in the last two quotes, that is 1882 and the 19 quotes is where they added the word called Naisal as then, which can be filed house, can be filed what the beauty of the police has been in and out, been discussed by the rule, by the courts. Even in 2013, after, even in 2013, after the amendment has happened, there are still doubts and discussions regarding, the picture I say wouldn't be, wasn't very clear. Then, with Leelta Kumari, things got sorted off, but again, there are a few more points which have to be covered, other that covered it, Leelta Kumari, which we would be covering in the post a bit. So that comes, yeah, I'll just say the information. Now the moment I say information, the law, Leelta Kumari very clearly told us, please don't give any kind of an interpretation, let's make things clear. You don't try to intend what the police could have thought, what the police should be, shouldn't the police do his own, his part of investigation, no, give it a little interpretation, give it a little interpretation. The question is, should you be doing a preliminary enquiry on an analysis, not only sections 154, when you go further, for sections 157, etc., when investigation is starting, 157 is after 154, wear it, wear it, the police is moving for an investigation. With 154, the law today, today there were a lot of discrepancies, but today the law is very clearly telling you that have you got the information and is the information something to be in the compliance bloc, it's record. It's simple as that. Whether you need to do a preliminary enquiry, because the word shall that is used, so that's the understanding, the word shall that is used in section 154, cross one of the code, is clearly showing the legislative intent. Legislative intent, because here again, give it a little interpretation, what could have been the discrepancies. All right, so here, the code clearly shows the legislative intent that it is mandatory to register and FYI, if the information given to the police discloses the commission of a cognizable office. That's very clear. So you don't have to, then the investigation, whether or not what is the investigation, it's later, or from what information that you're for. Do you understand that it's a good nice process? You need to, that's the information, that's the information which you are recording. All right? Now, if this is an information which is being done, when do you do it? So I hope I made my point clear with regard to when there's an FBI, the FBI comes into picture or the police is mandated, that is why we use the word called shall and we give it a little interpretation and then we say that, yes, the FBI has to be registered, if information gives you, reflects a cognizable office. That's it. It's simple. Where do you register? I think that is also one of those questions which have come up, which is, in fact, very interesting because that is also something which has been in and out to discuss what is this book, what is the diary, where do you go to it, how do you do it? And you know, there are quite a few things which were discussed before, which has been discussed before quite some time, which has been a part of discussion. Now, for this, I'd like to bring you on to two statistics, what, which is the criminal procedure code and the second one is the police act, section 44 of the police act of 1861. Now, that says about police officers to keep diary. Now, you know, when we look at the police act, the police act and criminal procedure code were made in 1861 or were brought into effect in 1861, both which were of the same young. Now, both then use the word called diary. Now, in 1872, all right, when there was a new code for criminal procedure which came up and then you had section 112 of the code which dealt with the issue of registration of FYR. Now, there, it said that is 112, section 112 of the scene, we see at that point of time, I kept just telling you how it came in of the CRPC that are told that every computer information which is preferred should be there of entered in a diary. The police officers shall enter it in a diary to be kept by such officer. So, there they use the word called diary. 44 is telling what, 44 is specifically telling about it shall be the June of every officer to keep a general diary. So, they are not just speaking about a general diary. They are not telling about when you get an information or when it is a cognizable but it's nothing. It's just touching that the police officers are supposed to keep a diary. Now, when it came to 1861, the CRPC section 139 of that type said that every computer which is preferred shall be entered in a diary. Then in 1872, again, the new code came and then it brought in the terminology called a book, all right? So, there it said, every complaint preferred to an officer in charge of a police station shall be used to write every complaint, okay? And shall this site see it on mark and the substance shall be entered in a book. So, here again, you have not spoken about a cognizable but all that it says every complaint which you have taken to an officer in charge shall be entered in a book. So, what happened is, instead of diary, in 1872, they introduced the word called book home. So, the word book clearly, so this is what the situation is. The word book clearly refers to something called the FIR book which is to be maintained. Now, so there, they were clearly trying to answer the whole question is do you maintain all the symptoms? That's what's important because you really look at how do you formulate legality for an FIR? How do you bring forth an FIR? How do you fix all these factors? I'll tell you why these factors? I'll tell you why we are discussing on this because there are two books which are made, you know, registers which are made which one can call as a general diary or station house diary and what can be called as FIR diary or an FIR book. Now, this FIR book is paged generally, I think to my restricted knowledge it's just 200 pages and, you know, the book can be changed, if there's a reason. New page that is where the FIR is to be charged has got a number. Whenever there's information asked to them as to a cognizable office that information with regard to the cognizable office has to be entered in the FIR book. So there, the normal couplets or non-fognizable office what happens on a day-to-day activity will not be registered. Now, why so? Is because FIR is registered when it is particularly a cognizable office. Now, if marked on that and if there is a number on that, it's not being manipulated. You know, many a times when the case comes it is annotated or there is a delay in filing an affair. So to a greater extent if this is managed that because of the number, then manipulation or tearing becomes very difficult. So thereby, this is the reason why it has to be recorded in the particular FIR book. So when it is, that shows that you have got it in the moment when you choose the name of the case from a nice perspective where it only is a start as to what you have done. Based on this information, have you taken action? Have you thought about it? Have you proceeded? Then it's fine, it's fine, it's fine, it's fine, it's fine. All that. The first thing have you done? So then, you know, there was one of those cases which I forgot the name. Where in this situation that discussed was, okay, I got the information. I'll check. I'll see if it is cognizable or not. Come back and have an interview with the FIR book. You can't do it because the book is information. I have a question that's, if you have some more of an experience about a cognizable book, you can enter it. Okay, so then it's exactly in the FIR book, okay? This is gender type, gender type, the station is daily and the station office is not the police act. The station office or the bandit's and the police officer took me in a diary just to record on a day to day activity. Even there, the number so and so and this guy was done. We didn't record him, but nothing he did. There will not be anything. It will only be a minimum information regarding what has happened. So that difference is there. I think that was also one of those questions which was asked. Is there a difference between general diary and a book? Yes, there is a difference. Yes, there is a difference FIR book and general diary. Though as the law changed, you know first because this cognizable book and information at your cognizable book was not there in the book. That's why I took you through the history first. It's only 1982 and 1998 when these changes happened that those changes came up. They did those most such changes. So that's why that's why when that nobody called a doubt was there from a diary to a book. So thereby moreover, I think this relation to this, we have a case Madhubala versus Suresh Kumar. Okay, so that's like 97 days, which is in the day. This is Madhubala versus Suresh Kumar. All right, that's a Supreme Court 1997 case, which they have in and out discussed with regard to how their fare has to be registered and how should the book be the book assistant of 200 pages and in the day is that particular case. So no, that's exactly what I'm trying to tell you. When you're able to do what you want to do, what you want to do is simply tell you, you can get information regarding. Now from that, how much of the law has developed? That's why this, the title of the stock itself is Gold and Coates case. So what's over here? It's studying the legislative history, looked into the legislative intentions, looked into what kind of interpretation has to be given and law, what can be a reform that can be brought through judicial activism, activism in the sense with regard to these functions of interpretation and application. So that's exactly why the terminology wrote a quote. So this is one of those cases. Madhubala versus Suresh Madhubala, B.A.L.A., Madhubala versus Suresh Kumar, 1970s, which is in detail done. And even this, you know, you have this case of Bajubala versus Steele. There also they have discussed a little bit about the state's diary and how, you know, it has to be entered in a book in a form which is commonly called the first information and all those things have been discussed in Bajubala's case as well. So those two are general cases which goes in detail with regard to where this F.A.R. has to be recorded. Now why I told that, why I stressed upon that is because one of the places or one of those places where the power gets manipulated or there's an abuse of process is when it particularly comes to F.A.R. So there is, this has been properly recorded in an F.A.R. book with dated with page numbers. Then these issues can be recorded to a large extent, whereas in a general diary, it's only a record of all the important transactions which are taken place in a particular police station, which also includes, you know, if there is a police staff which has got for something or come in something, I hand him over, taking over charge, arrest of a person, details of law and order, duties, visits, all this can be included. So there are a lot of things which can, so probably you can get lost into it and it will not avoid you to give in detail everything with regard to that. In the F.A.R. book, you have to give it details that is the relevancy to point out that this F.A.R. book is maintained with its number given on an annual basis. That means each F.A.R. has a unique annual number which will be given to it. So this is also, you know, like how we have reports, how you have case numbers. In the same way is how you have this F.A.R. numbers also. So because of this reason, you know, you can have a strict control. That's the only idea. You have a strict control and track over how many F.A.R.s have got registered, what is it registered? And so you can have a supervisory control over the police officers. So that makes it mandatory, okay? So that's one part. Now then another thing which I would want to discuss. So now we are at a situation where, you know, we know that it has to be done. We know that an F.A.R. has to be registered. It has to be entered into the F.A.R. book. Now we will not say a general diary again. We will not use the word by case diary again. We will use the word by F.A.R. book. Yeah, then we have my calendar, but then the F.A.R. book, all right? And now then that information. Now, you know, now what the courts have discussed generally is that there's purpose as to why they use this particular word called information and that too in section 1224, clause one. Now, they should, you know, section 41, clause one, which is arrest without warrant, which gives police the power of arrest without warrant, we have clauses, okay? Now in the clauses, there are certain terms which is being used. One of a few technologies are like credit information, reasonable complaint, reasonable suspicion. All these are the words which have been so, those suspicion, information has been qualified. Say a credible information, say a reasonable information. So when you're going to catch without warrant also, you should have really significant. You know why? Because you are taking the law and see without the warrant being issued and then the magistrate wants to, why what? So you will give the remote. Say yes to what conditions? More to work. When it is an arrest, you have got to do it. Then snow and then you need to produce personally the 24 hours law there. But when it is without the warrant, probably the fact that you are being arrested might not come to the college of the court unless you enter the police station or fill the police station. So because of all that, it can be caused by abuse, gross, or because there's power, sexes and sexes can be shunned. So arguably it's why the legislature well have to use those technologies, say reasonable suspicion, reasonable complaint, credible information, clearly. But they specifically avoided those terminologies. These terminologies have been avoided completely. So thereby, that reasonableness or credibility of the said information is not a condition present. You don't have to prove that it is reasonable. This is being the, this is one of those, this interpretation is what brought in confusion and disparity in this particular event. Say, do you need to confirm that the information that you got is reasonable? Do you need to understand that whether from where this information came and who was at first? So that study or that investigation or that preliminary inquiry regarding that information is not needed, is not a condition precedent for the registration of a case. Now, that is the law. Now, there again, you can still have the case of Bajumla versus Sting, where they have the courts have differentiated between 154 clause one and section 41, which is that is without warrant by the police, where in clause eight, they have used these words called reasonableness and all those things, and it has not been qualified. So that not only was much before discussed all the way, but in last case, okay? So then I think you also have a Prakash Singh model. So there are a couple of cases, you can just type, if you have your online sources, SCC online or your money partner, you can just have that Prakash Singh model case. So all that is very clearly telling you that it is just a mere information and what is the information, how far the information is true is not to be understood, is not a condition precedent. Let's not do that. This is what, when we stand at Lalitha Kumari, the situation is about. Now at the stage of registration of a crime or a case on the basis of the information which is disclosing a cognizable offence has to comply with the mandate of section 154 clause one of the court. Now here the police officer cannot, you know, embark upon an inquiry which is very clear whether the information is all that, whether it has to be done or not be done, this is out of question. So little interpretation, what you receive an information which is what the group has to look and take it forward. Record it. Now, whether you go for an investigation on how to select a partner which comes later, based on the information, yes, you have to proceed, that's a different thing, but that doesn't come, you can be analyzing the first information report. Now the next point, it's just, you know, why are you come, why are these being discussed? Okay, what is the significance and the compelling reasons for you to come up with this FAR that we are speaking about, it's very clear that even the legislative intent and all this has already been discussed, you know, where I've been in a catching on judicial decisions which is only telling you the option sought to be achieved by registering a particular FAR that is by registering, it is not an FAR by registering an earliest information. It's just speaking about an earliest information as an FAR, then it becomes as an FAR when you register it in the FAR book, till it is the earliest information that I've got regarding the Pugna's purpose which I have brought to the notice of the police. Are the police on its own, however it may be, okay? So there are two things, one, that the criminal process, which is a common thing, I think even if you are law student, that's one of those questions, you know, the FAR sets the criminal law in motion. So you need to discuss it, you need to analyze it, you need to critically examine it. Yes, that's because after that recording of the information is where the police proceeds, is where the police understands, oh yes, in my jurisdiction, there's something that just happened and I'm getting blown for further investigation. So that's the reason why we say that it sets the criminal law in motion and that the earliest information received with regard to any commission, you know, will be without any fear and embellishment. There, I would like to bring in the average value of an FAR. That was also one of those questions. My average value of FAR is almost being discussed in and out and I think it has been laid that, you know, it does not have a, it has got a corroborated evidence. It has got a corroborated evidence. However, it is not a substation, it's simply recorded by the police that made me analyze, you know, I think the case was Paramchit Kaur, you know, was a state where it was a FAR which was filed against a lady. She was the widow of an ex-servicement. So then the court did, people understand that this FAR was, you know, did not bring in any single state body and then this lady who's 70 years was in jail for eight days. So that was the situation. So that means by filing against the courts, there can be abuse of process. But then that abuse of process, as long as we have the 482 of the CRPC, I think the inherent power of the High Court, I think that is taken care of, that is the general opinion. But that's still, this can happen. So nobody is still motivated. However, to the possible manner, it is mandated as of today that an FAR has to be registered and the early FAR, the better. So it shows that there are no embellishments and that will always allow the court to at least look at it, you know, because in the FAR, because we said that it is a cooperative value, it can be used to quantity. It can be used to quantity the witness at the time of trial or the, you know, the investigating officer, you know, where you have a court and a sort of what bronze, what were the information source, a few things can come up there and hence it has got a corroborated effect. That is, what do you mean by corroborated effect? A lot of other evidences, if everything else goes perfect, then, or everything else is in line with the FAR. The FAR also stands as a piece of evidence. It has got a corroborated effect, it adds on. It strengthens the case. That's what it means. So that's generally, you know, based on that, there are now, so and that kind, you know, there are other few questions which can come up. I think it's with regard to what happens if there are two FARs. After learning so much, the law says, if there is any information of a coconut, I suppose it's recorded. So that means, or take note of it. That means, there cannot be other FARs subject matter. There they can be, so different things I'm not seeing, no. But you know, what is the nutritional value? What is it that's going on? See, you can find how many FARs you want on a particular cause of action. You can have FARs in different parts. Nobody says smoke to it, that's not the situation. But then when it comes to analyzing the FAR, or when it comes to referring to the FAR, what is the information? Those FARs is all the question. What happens? So the law says that FAR, which came first in time, which came first in time, and this is giving you a view of which is an information. It's more about the progressive limits, that is that particular matter, progressive limits, and how it turned out to be. Not anything else. So technically even, legally also, there normally can be only one FAR now. So you find two FARs probably at the situation or the place of people who are giving you, it might be different. So it might bring up different ways. So if you're able to substantiate it, then you can solve it in a club there, man. That's left to the court, that's left to the parties, and you know, that can be clubbed, and however that can be taken care of. But otherwise, for a particular case of FAR case, the very first time that you got an information, that's the first information. You might get a second information, you can get information on that case again, but that will turn out to be a second information. That is not the first information. The very first time it brings, comes to the knowledge of the police officers. That's the first information. So I think that question also gets done. So I was just trying to tell you about why you want this to be filed, why it is being so much about FAR, because these are the issues that, at the earliest, it has to be filed. And tomorrow, if you're reading it before the court, it has to stand, because generally, they discuss about two kinds of FAR. One, generally, when they're trying to tell about 154 clause one, and then otherwise under 157 clause one. So in all these situations, yes, you have an investigation which is going on, when you come to know you are there, you understand that there is an cognizable offense that happened in your presence. You can take up the matter, you can come back, you can register an FAR and all those things. So then it can be either under 154 clause one, or under 157 clause one. However, you can come up with FARs, but it has to be registered. However, it is first information. It has to be registered at the earliest, and it is mandatory. Now, one of the reasons, why do you say that it is important is because it has an access to justice. It shows an access to justice for a winter. Now, beyond all this, it upholds the rule of law, that if there is a commission of a cognizable offense, it has to be brought to the knowledge of the state. That's the second thought about it. And then, when you record it, it leads to less manipulation. All those are a few reasons as to why you will record it and why it is so significant that you will record it. And where you will record it, not an agenda dial in FAR. So all these issues, that's why I have been discussed. Now, before we wind it up, I would like to also bring up or bring to you this concept called a zero FAR, which is being discussed, which is quite commonly being discussed. Now, this zero FAR is something which did not come up with any case, but it was the law commission report which suggested that this FAR, the JSPAR was not coming to report in 2013, which suggested that there has to be something called a zero FAR. Now why? Many a times, the police would be reluctant to take up the FAR on ground saying that this is not a matter which comes under my jurisdiction, it is a matter which is to be taken care of by another police of the other jurisdiction. So, what is to be done? Now, what is the zero FAR? Now, we have to hear that, yeah, it is mandatory, you need to inform, it's mandatory, no doubt. You have to, but then you will do that. Now, this was discussed and based on this, there were rations which were brought in by the government of India. There was an advisory which was circulated almost in 2014, February, where they said that it was the Ministry of Home Affairs of the government of India which brought in this concept of the zero FAR. Second, they gave guidance or they made it mandatory for mandatory FAR and then there were exceptions where you don't have to go with it, you have the exceptions to that. So that is like commercial transactions, matrimonial cases, then medical negligence, so all sort of few exceptions, but beyond that. In all the other matters, mandatory FAR, we have to be there, something called a zero FAR. So this was the advice which was given by the government of India in 2013 for which it was given to all police stations. I can tell why it was not fulfilled because I'd like to take you to a case in 2019, which was filed in the Karnataka High Court, started Oma Paddy v. State of Karnataka, 2019. Now this advisory that I told you is 2014 and this case that I told you is in 2019, that is a great variation, it's filed into the High Court. Telling the High Court that these advisories were there, I'd still not be able to explain it. There is nothing to explain. We don't know what's happening. And then the court is supposed to give directions that it's filed an advisory being there from the government of India. None of the states have publicly implement and in fact there were two conditions, one to bring in zero FAR and second was FAR centers. So FAR centers, on a reading what I understood is the court has said that FAR centers bringing up is all executive policy decisions. It is not our policy, it is not for us to decide, that they will decide. But however when there's a regulation and there's an advisory from the government here saying that you need to have zero FAR setting your heart to the zero FAR, then the directive is passed by the court. So though in 2013, the JS Oma Committee told about the zero FAR and then there were advisories which were passed by the government of India it's still in question as to whether they are or whether that's happening. At least 2019 case you just see as back was was what do you call I'll come to the question, okay. Whether it was, what do you call it applied or not is something which is answered through Oma Pathy versus state of Karnataka where the court said that it has not been done and hence state of Karnataka needs to be here. So that zero zero FAR is nothing but wherever you want that can be filed and the court takes either police takes the responsibility to get it registered with the proper police station. Okay, so that's what you mean by a zero FAR. There's no place that jurisdiction if you doesn't come, that's what you mean by zero FAR. However, that zero FAR concept is from the JS Oma Committee because many of them are under the impression that it was Geretha Kumari that in that case they don't know that actually start with the JS Oma Committee report and then with the advisories of the central government of the government of India which is still not big but however Oma Pathy's case in the good example where there was discussion that was one of the latest cases in 2019 which discussed about having zero FARs and that could pass to the government asking the government to remit it at the earliest. Now, so I hope I have made some sense with regard to what an FAR means and the points regarding FAR as touched upon. Any doubt, I think I already got one question because the average value of this FAR book and case area that's what I told you about the average value of an FAR. See that FAR that we speak about is entered in a book. So obviously when you speak about the average value of an FAR it's not about the information that you're talking about it's about the information that is entered that we are speaking about because by the time the trial happens the time would have passed and you probably do not remember what information was. So information which is entered in the FAR book is what is generally being questioned about and that is where it's been about the average value and as I told you has just got a co-operative value it's not a substantial piece of evidence it's not a lot of work for the main reason that it is the executive and like how we record confessions and confessions not being accepted in the same way, there are these issues again but how it is about co-operative value and all circumstances fall into place are chained together without any gap in its length then under these circumstances the FAR also stands as a good piece of evidence moreover this FAR can be used for contradicting also any statements that is made at the time of questioning and when the police have questioned you and you have recorded this and the statements haven't been recorded and when you come to the court during trial you change your statements the statement that the court which was done at that point of time that is a witness statement generally can be coordinated in the same way I know the FAR they investigate the officer when he is called for you know this is what you have recorded and this is what you are saying now so that can be contradicted for that generally you can use an FAR otherwise on a single line FAR has got a co-operative evidentiary value I hope I have made sense I hope that I have touched all the important points just to go through it we have looked at the interpretation of section 154 we have looked at what is this information that you are speaking about under 154 you are speaking about why is it important then second and then when you get this information where will you record it will you record it in the general diary where is it we said no it is the FAR book the general diary we have it but not in detail but it's the FAR book which is page annually registered with wrong law it's crime was committed by murder but I think I didn't get that he says that let's assume that the FAR has been lodged again for an offence under murder but eventually it is found that it was only huh that's a mistake and dense if it is a murder it can get forced now that is what I told you if we want to have a move it is just a piece of shit that we are speaking about we are not speaking about that it is speaking simple that's why you know I think I should I'll just give you a little time for much more but I'll just take you through 157 because it says get from the investigation receive an anonymized an offence charged for police station has reasons to suspect the commission which is empowered then he will go in for investigation that's the investigation it's not investigation if you just want if we have just an investigation that I got that is not an investigation it is not an investigation based on the investigation that I got which is not an investigation I know it's all I can understand so there you will exercise the powers of investigation which is given to you under the code and then you will formulate your case so if it doesn't mean investigation it only allows it gives you the chance it is a must therefore you don't know for what I got information let me understand let me see what that information is that so you will verify it there is nothing you know which you need to deal with the death so that can be an internal that can be internal but otherwise but that doesn't mean that you will not mark it that doesn't mean that you will not mark it that information has to be recorded that's the status that is given just you know the other reasons I told you in the beginning not of the reasons when the code even though you know the code says that there are no entities to study and data on that it is very clearly shown that if we are registered if we are not taken into I am equally the same numbers so for that not to happen whether there is validity or not whether there is not it or not is something that we will look into their powers given to you you have a criticism where you are going for then we take care of them but then that doesn't mean that you will stop permanently this is exactly where there is a disparity so could the could the police officer say no I will think about it and I will take yes that is how it was that's exactly why we have to talk about F.A.R. today that's how it was and then have been instances that's the reason why the code through the Kumari until I need it is not that it was not there only issue was why the Kumari became important is only because the decisions before this was also there like I quoted Bajan Bajan Laj's case Tarpasi all those cases are there but however it's underlined the constitutional bench underlined the fact that yes those laws hold good and this matter that in F.A.R. has to be filed or registered because it's not that it came first in let it to Kumari's case it was being told but however you had no sense you had a yes and no so that's the reason why you know it was being planned but I would say it was being planned fight and it got settled in the end of the month but it's not that it it is not that this case was brought this out you understand so that is a mandate after this kind of investigation and you can't move in forward with what have been said and so on I hope I yeah yeah we have few questions which had already shared I will take those questions I will take those questions what about the double F.A.R. which one will be considered yeah that's exactly give me a second I just take those questions even I think I have those questions one second so what do you mean by double F.A.R. now the double F.A.R. I think in the course of it I told you there's nothing called a double F.A.R. okay there's only first information report there can be circumstances where you might get a yeah one second okay the question is yeah the what F.A.R. says is on the same there can be one or two information that you got but what should go in the book is the very first time that you got an information as to a cognizable office so that information it gives you a cognizable office is the first information report even if there are two three four the quote is not bothered about because it is an F.A.R. book which shows which information because on the same facts with the same people generally the police you know even if they enter it it is if it is the same case if it is the same course of action and it is the same parties the quote goes to that first recording that has happened the first information that has happened in the register that cannot be to then the issue of first doesn't come at all so there cannot be two or three that can only be for every case that can be only one information technically but first information technically there can be information but what first information taken the second question is that let's assume there is a confection before the police in a letter etc does it amount to a confessional F.A.R. or can it be treated as a first information is that an eighth question fifth question okay let's return to police about confession of a crime that does amount see I think yeah this because these questions came before I I had I had started the session the question is let's return to police about the confession if a confession can be an information confession is your guilt you are speaking about your guilt that's the problem now in ways we know about the evidence regarding your confession how far that has been taken and your confession no police officer it is not valid but what we will look at it from through the ILOB 1615 to police does confession give you an information that what I confess is it give you an information as to who has written this yes if so yes it can be but there don't look at it valid confession will the police take up that confession again against me the police cannot do anything that the evidence act is very clear on that the evidence act says confession made to a police officer is of no value so that is clear so you don't have to worry regarding if you are confessing it doesn't matter because the police is the police can't do anything about it because the evidence law doesn't take it because there are criteria for which even 167 write along with the sections 25, 26, etc will tell you what is the law relating to confession so there you know you can I think I've done one session on confession and admissions too okay so there you can see that the identity value it has got no identity value so confession don't give stress on confession whether the confession that you did is given an information then it is valid that information can be taken up as an effect so we only call it getting information then you can go in for an investigation whether that don't have to be a confession or not because it's an automatic evidence to evaluate is already being said we will take the last question this is the 9th one case diary and daily diary report is there any difference? yeah I think difference I think I've made it case diary and daily diary report is almost one and the same in different days they call it general diary they call it case diary but otherwise otherwise under 173 there is that is the investigation of the police comes to an end with the some question of an investigation report alright so then well I mean sorry 172 alright then it says every police officer making an investigation under the standard that is the investigation shall they enter this proceedings in the investigation in the diary setting forth the time at which the information reached it okay so the time at which the information reached is the first information that reached it the time at which he began he began himself under 51 57 and closed his investigation under 157 he can go and then you know under the section say that the police officer will have to move to that place have to question people who are acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case so there are a couple of investigations will discuss so that's where he began at closest investigation the place etc etc so that is where you know the statement of witnesses record during the course of this investigation under section 161 shall be inserted in the case diary so there were 172 is K Dari that is under 172 the other one is a general Dari General Dari station house Dari and all daily Dari yeah daily Dari and the general Dari and all almost the same case that may come under 172 and this general Dari and Dari have gone to section 44 of the police at 1861 so it comes there there is just maintain and you know you're coming in and out and what all has happened it's just that like a register will maintain case value under specificity under on same that is with the under specific cases when you are submitting the investigation that's a case like that with only those cases that particular investigation that you have done that particular case starting from the F.A.R. book or the F.A.R. registration that aside from there on births thank you for sharing your knowledge and everyone stay safe stay blessed much better thank you so much Mr. Vikas and beyond law I hope you know the session was brought in through some light on the concept of F.A.R. and the law relating to F.A.R. I wouldn't say the average value F.A.R. rather the law relating to F.A.R. and the various laws thank you that was as clear as an own day yeah thank you