Omission To Name Some Accused In FIR Is A Relevant Fact Under Section 11 Evidence Act : Supreme Court
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Omission To Name Some Accused In FIR Is A Relevant Fact Under Section 11 Evidence Act : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court recently noted that a crime witness would usually mention all perpetrators in the FIR. This omission, though otherwise irrelevant, becomes a relevant fact under Section 11 of the Evidence Act, the Court stated. The Court observed that the complainant's omission to name two perpetrators in FIR, otherwise not relevant, becomes relevant fact under Section 11 of the Evidence Act. The Court cited the case of Ram Kumar Pandey vs. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1975 SC 1026 to hold that if the complainant truly saw three people commit the crime, it's highly probable he would mention all of them in the FIR. We think that omissions of such important facts, affecting the probabilities of the case, are relevant under Section 11 of the Evidence Act in judging the veracity of the prosecution case.” Accordingly, the Court dismissed the State's appeal and affirmed the acquittal based on the complainant's omission to mention all the perpetrators in the FIR making the prosecution's highly improbable.

Court Case Fir Section 11 Adv Mention Omission Relevant Fact  evidence  mention  adv  perpetrators  fir  omission  court  accused  act  mr  11  case  supreme  relevant  fact

History of this topic

Omission To Record Statement Of Accused Under Section 242 CrPC Not Fatal: J&K High Court
3 years, 8 months ago

Omission To Record Statement Of Accused Under Section 242 CrPC Not Fatal: J&K High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court has held that in the absence of any prejudice to the accused or demonstrated failure of justice, omission to record his statement under Section 242 of CrPC cannot be held to be fatal to the validity of the trial. The Court noted, "The petitioner has not been able to demonstrate as to how omission …

Non-Mentioning Of Accused’s Name In FIR Not A Ground To Doubt Its Contents: SC [Read Judgment]
7 years, 1 month ago

Non-Mentioning Of Accused’s Name In FIR Not A Ground To Doubt Its Contents: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

Some times in the state of shock, they may miss the important details, because people tend to react differently when they come across a violent act, the bench said.The Supreme Court, in Latesh @ Dadu Baburao Karlekar v The State of Maharashtra, has reiterated that merely because the names of the accused are not stated and their names are not …

No Inconsistency In Chargesheeting Accused Not Named In FIR: SC [Read Judgment]
7 years, 11 months ago

No Inconsistency In Chargesheeting Accused Not Named In FIR: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

The Court observed that FIR clearly mentions that the number of accused persons as 12, though only five were named.The Supreme Court, in Fazar Ali vs State of Assam, has held that there is no inconsistency in chargesheeting and convicting persons who have not been named along with the other accused in the First Information Report.In a criminal appeal before …

Discover Related