Merely Because FIR Is Drafted With Advocate’s Assistance, It Cannot Be Presumed False: Allahabad High Court
The High Court held that the mere fact that a First Information Report was written with the assistance of a private advocate does not render it doubtful or motivated.
Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan, Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary, Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench
The Allahabad High Court, while partly allowing a criminal appeal, upheld the conviction of the appellant in an acid attack case and clarified that an FIR does not lose credibility merely because it was drafted with the help of an advocate.
The appeal arose from a judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge whereby the appellant had been convicted under Sections 304, 326-A and 452 of the Indian Penal Code for an acid attack that resulted in the deaths of two women. The appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary, observed: “merely on the ground that the F.I.R. was written through the assistance of a lawyer, it cannot be assumed that the informant has lodged a false First Information Report against the Appellant. Further, the F.I.R. being lodged with an advocate’s assistance does not by itself dilute the credibility of the said F.I.R., the only caveat that the same requires careful scrutiny to ensure that the same is not malicious or motivated. This Court fails to understand that when legal aid is permissible, at every steps of a criminal legal proceedings and even at the stage of lodging an F.I.R., how can there be an embargo on seeking assistance from a private Advocate”.
Background
The prosecution's case was that acid was thrown on the victim, who later succumbed to septicemia caused by deep burn injuries. The FIR was lodged on 9 May 2014.
During the trial, the prosecution examined eyewitnesses, medical experts, and the Investigating Officer. The medical evidence confirmed that both deceased suffered extensive ante-mortem burn injuries and died due to septicemic shock resulting from those injuries. The forensic report detected sulphuric acid on the recovered articles. On appreciation of the evidence, the trial court convicted the appellant.
In appeal, the defence sought to assail the conviction on multiple grounds, including delay in lodging the FIR and the fact that the complaint had been drafted with the assistance of an advocate.
The appellant argued that the FIR was doubtful because it was written with the help of a private lawyer and lodged after consultation. It was contended that this circumstance suggested fabrication and manipulation.
Court’s Observation
Rejecting this submission, the High Court observed that the informant was an illiterate villager who had just witnessed a grave incident in which two close family members suffered severe acid burns. In such circumstances, it was natural for him to seek assistance from a literate person, even if that person happened to be an advocate.
The Court categorically held that merely on the ground that the F.I.R. was written with the assistance of a lawyer, it cannot be assumed that the informant has lodged a false First Information Report against the Appellant.
The Court further added that “the F.I.R. being lodged with an advocate’s assistance does not by itself dilute the credibility of the said F.I.R., the only caveat that the same requires careful scrutiny to ensure that the same is not malicious or motivated.”
Furthermore, the Bench underscored that “when legal aid is permissible, at every steps of a criminal legal proceedings and even at the stage of lodging an F.I.R., how can there be an embargo on seeking assistance from a private Advocate.”
The Court emphasised that an FIR is not expected to be an encyclopedia of facts and is not a substantive piece of evidence. Its purpose is to set the criminal law in motion. Therefore, merely because it was drafted with legal assistance does not render it suspicious.
The Court also addressed the argument regarding the delay in lodging the FIR. It noted that the victims had been immediately rushed to hospitals for treatment and that prioritising medical attention over prompt registration of the FIR was natural human conduct in such circumstances. The delay, therefore, stood satisfactorily explained.
On merits, the Court found that the ocular testimony of the eyewitnesses was cogent and trustworthy and was duly corroborated by medical and forensic evidence. The contention that death occurred due to septicemia unrelated to the acid attack was rejected. The Court held that septicemia was a direct consequence of the deep acid burn injuries.
The High Court concluded that the prosecution had proved the charges under Sections 304, 326-A and 452 IPC beyond a reasonable doubt and affirmed the conviction.
Conclusion
While upholding the conviction, the Court considered the period of incarceration already undergone by the appellant, the absence of prior criminal history, and the principles of reformative justice. In exercise of its powers, it modified the sentence of life imprisonment to a fixed term of fourteen years’ rigorous imprisonment, while maintaining the fines and other sentences imposed by the trial court.
Cause Title: Jagdamba Harijan v. State of Uttar Pradesh (Neutral Citation: 2026:AHC-LKO:11040-DB)
Appearances
Appellant: Advocate Rajendra Prasad Mishra
Respondents: Government Advocate
