Delay in FIR Registration is Fatal to Prosecution Case," Rules Punjab and Haryana High Court

High Court upholds acquittal in theft case, emphasizing the critical impact of unexplained delays and unreliable evidence. - The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the acquittal of two individuals in a theft case, reinforcing the importance of timely FIR registration and the credibility of evidence. The court, presided over by Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, dismissed the revision petition filed by the complainant, Sukhchain Singh, who had challenged the acquittal of the accused by the Sessions Judge, Faridkot. The judgment stressed that the unexplained delay in filing the FIR and discrepancies in recovery evidence were significant factors leading to the dismissal of the petition.

The case originated from an FIR registered on April 25, 2009, based on allegations by Sukhchain Singh that he witnessed the respondents escaping from his house on the night of May 21-22, 2009. Upon checking, he discovered that a hole had been made in the roof of his room and several items, including gold ornaments, two mobile phones, and Rs. 10,000, were stolen. The trial court convicted the respondents under Sections 457 and 380 of the IPC, sentencing them to two years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine. However, the respondents were acquitted under Section 411 IPC. On appeal, the Sessions Judge, Faridkot, acquitted the respondents of all charges, leading to the current revision petition.

Delay in FIR Registration: Justice Bedi highlighted the critical issue of the delay in FIR registration. "The theft allegedly took place on the night of May 21-22, 2009, at about 3:00 AM, and the FIR was recorded only on May 24, 2009, at 5:30 PM. This delay is fatal to the prosecution's case," observed the court. The complainant's explanation that the delay was due to inaction by the Sarpanch was deemed insufficient, especially given the discrepancies in the testimonies of key witnesses.

Discrepancies in Evidence: The court scrutinized the inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence, particularly the recovery process. "The recovery of stolen items was not proved beyond a reasonable doubt. H.C. Jagsir Singh, who allegedly effected the recoveries, was not examined as a prosecution witness, and there were several discrepancies in the statements given by other witnesses," noted Justice Bedi. The lack of examination of crucial witnesses and the conflicting testimonies further weakened the prosecution's case.

Influence of Village Factionalism: Justice Bedi also pointed to the possibility of extraneous influences affecting the case. Testimonies revealed that there was enmity between different factions in the village, which could have led to false implications. "The involvement of village factionalism cannot be ignored, as it raises serious doubts about the credibility of the prosecution's case," the judgment stated.

Justice Bedi remarked, "The delay in FIR registration and the failure to substantiate the recovery of stolen items with credible evidence are significant factors that undermine the prosecution's case. The discrepancies and lack of reliable witnesses make it imperative to uphold the acquittal."

The High Court's dismissal of the revision petition reinforces the judiciary's stance on the necessity of prompt and reliable evidence in criminal cases. By emphasizing the criticality of timely FIR registration and consistent witness testimonies, this judgment serves as a significant precedent in similar cases. The ruling underscores the importance of procedural diligence and credible evidence in upholding convictions, ensuring justice is served based on solid and unassailable grounds.

Date of Decision: May 2, 2024

Sukhchain Singh v. State of Punjab & Others