Cancellation of FIR by the Police

Officer-in-Charge of a Police Station or for that matter any other Senior Police Officer cannot cancel FIR. He has no power to cancel the FIR, even after investigation discloses that no offence has been committed. After completion of his investigation, he has to forward the police report in final form as required under Section 173 (2) Code of Criminal Procedure for the approval of the Magistrate. When the Magistrate accepts it, consider the FIR cancelled. But, if the Magistrate rejects it, it means the cancellation hasn't happened.

Classification of Police Report in Final Form or Final Report

Final Report or Police Report in Final Form (excluding charge sheet) can be of the following five types when sent to the Magistrate by the Officer-in-Charge of a Police Station on completion of investigation of a case:

1. Final Report True (FRT):
   Whenever, the investigating police officer submits a final report stating that the alleged occurrence happened in due mode and manner but the accused persons are not liable for committing such an offence, such report may be considered as final report true (FRT) e.g., a theft having been committed at the place of occurrence but the accused arrested or named in FIR are not liable for the same. If the FRT is accepted by the Magistrate, the proceedings are dropped and the FIR is presumed cancelled provided there is no Protest or Narazi petition filed in this regard.
    
2. Final Report False (FRF):
   Whenever an investigating officer makes a final report that the alleged incident did not occur in the proper mode and manner and the accused is not responsible for the crime, such report may be considered as a final report false (FRF) e.g., no theft was committed at the scene of the crime, nor the accused were responsible for it. If the FRF is accepted by the Magistrate, the proceedings are dropped and the FIR is presumed cancelled provided there is no Protest or Narazi petition filed in this regard.
    
3. Final Report Mistake of Fact (FRMF):
   Whenever the investigating police officer makes a final report to the effect that the alleged incident did not take place in the proper mode and manner or did not constitute any offence and that the accused are not responsible for the commission of such act, such report shall be deemed to be a final report as mistake of fact (FRMF), e.g., allegations made against the accused of kidnapping and rape, but found to have been a love affair and marriage. If the FRMF is accepted by the Magistrate, the proceedings are dropped and the FIR is presumed cancelled provided there is no Protest or Narazi petition filed in this regard.
    
4. Final Report Mistake of Law (FRML):
   Whenever the investigating police officer makes a report that the alleged incident did not happen in the proper mode and manner or that it was not an offence and that the accused are not responsible for the commission of the crime, such report can be considered as final report mistake of law. Act (FRML) e.g., charges levelled against the accused for kidnapping and rape but it was found that it was a love affair and marriage took place with the full consent of the mature victim which does not constitute any offence under the Act, and neither the husband nor the wife was minor. If the FRML is accepted by the Magistrate, the proceedings are dropped and the FIR is presumed cancelled provided there is no Protest or Narazi petition filed in this regard.
    
5. Final Report Non-Cog. (FRNC):
   Whenever, the investigating police officer submits a final report stating that the alleged occurrence having been happened but not in due mode and manner and the accused are liable for committing this non-cognizable offence, such report may be considered as final report non-cog (FRNC) e.g., allegation brought against the accused under section 326 IPC but it is found that the nature of the crime constitutes an offence under section 323 of IPC. If the FRNC is accepted by the Magistrate, the proceedings are changed and the FIR is presumed cancelled provided there is no Protest or Narazi petition filed in this regard.

There is no provision in the CrPC for the cancellation of FIR. Sometimes, the Police Officer after investigation of the case feels that no case is made out against the accused or that the evidence is deficient and he releases the accused on personal bond or on surety according to Section 169 CrPC. While sending the accused, the Police Officer recommends for discharge of the accused from the case. If Magistrate feels that no case is made out against the accused, he may drop the proceedings and discharge the accused person. If the Magistrate drops the proceedings, it can be understood that the FIR is cancelled. In reality, there is no provision in the CrPC for the cancellation of FIR.

It is open to the Magistrate to agree with the Police Report or not to agree with the same. In India Corote Ltd. V. State of Karnataka 1989 Cr LJ 964 = AIR SC 885, it was held that the Magistrate can take into account the statements of the witnesses examined by the police during investigation and take cognizance of the offence complained of and order issue of process to the accused.

Cancellation of FIR by the Magistrate

Every investigation shall be completed without unnecessary delay. After completion of investigation, the police have to file report under Section 173 (2) CrPC in terms of Section 173 (1) CrPC; the facts and conclusions drawn by the Police therefrom are contained in the Police Report. Upon the receipt of the Police Report, the Magistrate is entitled to take cognizance of the offence under Section 190 (1) (b) of the CrPC if a case is made out.

He can drop the proceedings if no case is made out; though he cannot cancel the FIR directly. In the event of dropping of proceedings by the Magistrate, the FIR is presumed to have been cancelled. This normally happens when the investigating officer files FRT, FRMF, FRML and FRNC. However, this is not the case and there is no dropping of proceedings or presumed cancellation of FIR if charge sheet is filed against the accused persons.

Withdrawal of FIR

FIR once lodged cannot be withdrawn by the Informant. Always FIR will be lodged with the Officer-in-Charge of Police Station as to the commission of cognizable offence. Almost all cognizable offences are serious in nature and also presumed that they have been committed not only against the individual victim, but also against the State. In such circumstances, an individual victim shall not be allowed to withdraw FIR filed by him. The Officer-in-Charge of Police Station or any other Senior Police Officer or the Court has also no power to allow the informant to withdraw the FIR.

Quashing/Cancellation of FIR by High Court

In cases where a cognizable crime is committed, the Police Station is the place where an FIR can be filed. Unfortunately, there are instances where people file false FIRs to trouble innocent individuals or settle personal or political scores. Sometimes FIR is also filed in cases which are civil in nature.

It is even seen that the FIR has been filed by concocting a story containing ingredients of non-bailable offences in a bailable case or where no case is made out. Hence, a provision under section 482 CrPC has been made to quash or cancel such false and fabricated FIRs by the High Courts.

In Bhajan Lal Case on 21 November, 1990 in Supreme Court, the following guidelines were laid out by the Supreme Court for quashing of FIR under Section 482 CrPC:

• Situations where the assertions contained in the FIR or the complaint, even if taken at face value and wholly accepted, do not inherently establish an offence or construct a viable case against the accused.
   
• Cases where the allegations in the FIR, together with any accompanying materials, do not disclose a cognizable offence deserving of investigation by an enforcement agency under Section 156(1) CrPC, except under the auspices of a mandate under Section 155(2) of the CrPC.
   
• Scenarios wherein the uncontroverted allegations in the FIR or complaint, coupled with the collected evidence, do not showcase the perpetration of any offence or substantiate a case against the accused.
   
• Cases where the allegations contained in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but instead correspond to a non-cognizable offence, which precludes a police investigation without the mandate of a Magistrate as provided in Section 155(2) CPC.
   
• Cases where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so outlandish and improbable in nature that no reasonable individual could reasonably conclude that there is reasonable justification for proceeding against the accused.
   
• Scenarios where explicit legal barriers are incorporated within the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or the pertinent Act (under which the criminal proceedings are initiated), barring the initiation and continuation of the proceedings. This might also apply when the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or the concerned Act furnishes a viable mechanism for redressing the grievance of the aggrieved party.
   
• Cases where the criminal proceedings are blatantly malicious and/or are deliberately initiated with an ulterior agenda to wreak vengeance on the accused and defame him due to personal grudges and vendettas.

References:

• https://www.daily-sun.com/printversion/details/459300
• First Information Report, Mangari Rajender, Asia Law House, Hyderabad
• https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-13229-quashing-of-fir-by-high-courts-and-supreme-court.html

Written By: Md.Imran Wahab, IPS, IGP, Provisioning, West Bengal
Email: [email protected], Ph no: 9836576565