अशोक कुमार चौधरी विरूद्ध विहार राज्य 2008 ए0आई0आर0 2436 के मामले मे माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय ने यह अभिधारित किया है कि प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट दर्ज कराने मे हुई विलवंता मात्र के आधार पर अभियोजन के मामले को परित्यक्त नही किया जा सकता है।माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय ने निर्णय की कंडिका-14 मे यह अभिधारित किया है किः-
14. It is trite that mere delay in lodging the first information report is not by itself fatal to the case of the prosecution. Nevertheless, it is a relevant factor of which the Court is obliged to take notice and examine whether any explanation for the delay has been offered and if offered, whether it is satisfactory or not. If no satisfactory explanation is forthcoming, an adverse inference may be drawn against the prosecution. However, in the event, the delay is properly and satisfactorily explained; the prosecution case cannot be thrown out merely on the ground of delay in lodging the F.I.R. Obviously, the explanation has to be considered in the light of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case.
15. On this aspect, in AIR 2001 SUPREME COURT 2075 State of H.P. vs. Gian Chand a three-Judge Bench of this Court had observed thus :
"Delay in lodging the FIR cannot be used as a ritualistic formula for doubting the prosecution case and discarding the same solely on the ground of delay in lodging the first information report. Delay has the effect of putting the court on its guard to search if any explanation has been offered for the delay, and if offered, whether it is satisfactory or not. If the prosecution fails to satisfactorily explain the delay and there is a possibility of embellishment in the prosecution version on account of such delay, the delay would be fatal to the prosecution. However, if the delay is explained to the satisfaction of the court, the delay cannot by itself be a ground for disbelieving and discarding the entire prosecution case."
अमरसिह विरूद्ध वलविन्दरसिह 2003 ए0आई0आर0-1164 के मामले मे माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय ने यह अभिधारित किया है कि प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट दर्ज कराने मे हुई विलवंता कई कारको पर निर्भर करती है माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय ने अभिधारित किया है किः-
"...........There is no hard and fast rule that any delay in lodging the FIR would automatically render the prosecution case doubtful. It necessarily depends upon facts and circumstances of each case whether there has been any such delay in lodging the FIR which may cast doubt about the veracity of the prosecution case and for this a host of circumstances like the condition of the first informant, the nature of injuries sustained, the number of victims, the efforts made to provide medical aid to them, the distance of the hospital and the police station, etc. have to be taken into consideration. There is no mathematical formula by which an inference may be drawn either way merely on account of delay in lodging of the FIR.............."
14. It is trite that mere delay in lodging the first information report is not by itself fatal to the case of the prosecution. Nevertheless, it is a relevant factor of which the Court is obliged to take notice and examine whether any explanation for the delay has been offered and if offered, whether it is satisfactory or not. If no satisfactory explanation is forthcoming, an adverse inference may be drawn against the prosecution. However, in the event, the delay is properly and satisfactorily explained; the prosecution case cannot be thrown out merely on the ground of delay in lodging the F.I.R. Obviously, the explanation has to be considered in the light of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case.
15. On this aspect, in AIR 2001 SUPREME COURT 2075 State of H.P. vs. Gian Chand a three-Judge Bench of this Court had observed thus :
"Delay in lodging the FIR cannot be used as a ritualistic formula for doubting the prosecution case and discarding the same solely on the ground of delay in lodging the first information report. Delay has the effect of putting the court on its guard to search if any explanation has been offered for the delay, and if offered, whether it is satisfactory or not. If the prosecution fails to satisfactorily explain the delay and there is a possibility of embellishment in the prosecution version on account of such delay, the delay would be fatal to the prosecution. However, if the delay is explained to the satisfaction of the court, the delay cannot by itself be a ground for disbelieving and discarding the entire prosecution case."
अमरसिह विरूद्ध वलविन्दरसिह 2003 ए0आई0आर0-1164 के मामले मे माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय ने यह अभिधारित किया है कि प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट दर्ज कराने मे हुई विलवंता कई कारको पर निर्भर करती है माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय ने अभिधारित किया है किः-
"...........There is no hard and fast rule that any delay in lodging the FIR would automatically render the prosecution case doubtful. It necessarily depends upon facts and circumstances of each case whether there has been any such delay in lodging the FIR which may cast doubt about the veracity of the prosecution case and for this a host of circumstances like the condition of the first informant, the nature of injuries sustained, the number of victims, the efforts made to provide medical aid to them, the distance of the hospital and the police station, etc. have to be taken into consideration. There is no mathematical formula by which an inference may be drawn either way merely on account of delay in lodging of the FIR.............."
No comments:
Post a Comment