Registration of Second FIR (First Information Report) in Sughran Bibi
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Review of Education, Administration and Law (REAL) Vol. 3, (1) 2020, 113-122 Registration of Second FIR (First Information Report) in Sughran Bibi Case: A Landmark Judgement of the Supreme Court of Pakistan a b c d Rais Nouman Ahmad, Faiz Bakhsh, M. Danyal Khan, Sidra Kanwal a Assistant Professor, University Gillani Law College, Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan b Assistant Professor, University Gillani Law College, Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan E-mail: [email protected] c PhD Scholar Brunel University, London, UK. E-mail: [email protected] d LLM Scholar, Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan, E-mail: [email protected] ARTICLE DETAILS ABSTRACT History: The registration of First Information Report (FIR) has remained a Accepted 12 May 2020 challenging area for the judicial system of Pakistan; the multiplicity of the Available Online 30 June 2020 FIRs means separate investigation and separate police report. Precedents were available far and against the second FIR which had been creating Keywords: perplexity and nuisance for law enforcement agencies. First Information First Information Report (FIR), Report is contaminated by the inclusion of exaggerated facts by the Sughran Bibi Case, Supreme aggrieved parties. Moreover, there are several allegations on the working Court, Judgment of police in Pakistan for drafting the FIR arbitrarily. Although FIR is a mere document to report the incident, however, it has gained a significant JEL Classification: role in deciding the fate of a criminal trial in Pakistan. Therefore, it is L86, L89 imperative to examine the status of FIR in criminal-trail framework of Pakistan. To do this, Sughran Bibi Case is very significant in interpreting DOI: 10.47067/real.v3i1.26 the status of multiplicity of FIRs in the criminal trail framework. Seven judges of esteemed Supreme Court decided the fate of second FIR in this human rights case. The study investigates the doctrinal aspects of the judgement by presenting a theoretical examination of the status of FIR, its evidentiary value, and effectiveness in the criminal trial framework. © 2020 The authors. Published by SPCRD Global Publishing. This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial 4.0 Corresponding author’s email address: [email protected] 1. Introduction The method of lodging a first information report (FIR) is followed in South Asian and Southeast Asian countries including Myanmar, India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. The police organizations in these countries prepare a document (commonly known as FIR) at the time of receiving information, normally in the form of complaint lodged by a person, victim of a cognizable offence, or someone else on the behalf 113 Review of Education, Administration and Law (REAL) Vol. 3, (1) 2020, 113-122 of that person. However, it is not mandatory that only victim or someone on the behalf of the said victim is required to make such report to the police. This report can be made by anyone, including police officers, having the knowledge of the happening of such offence. The purpose of lodging FIR is to set the process of criminal justice in motion. The police organizations start investigation of most type of cases once FIR is registered. The criminal justice system of Pakistan provides rules for registration of FIR, by police on the reporting of an event or criminal incident an offence (for which police are not required to obtain an arrest warrant to make an arrest), under the Code of Criminal Procedure. ‘Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence, if given orally to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf.’ The concept of the FIR is simply the earliest intimation or communication about the occurrence of a cognizable offence, to the relevant police station, for the purpose of setting the investigation into motion. The FIR contains all the relevant information about the incident as to the place of incident, offence, description or identity of the suspected offenders, roles of the suspects and commission of offence. The essential purpose of FIR is very simple, informing the police authorities about the commission of a cognizable offence, not a conclusive or binding primary document. However, historically, the court system of Pakistan has been placing much higher evidentiary value on the contents and sanctity of the FIR.The trial courts, as well as superior courts, have been relying upon the significant details relating events, identity and role of the accused mentioned in the FIR for the purpose of conviction.This unnecessary reliance of the courts and judicial system has encouraged the prosecution, with the help of complainants and police, to fabricate FIRs through reverse-engineering. Consequently, this process has helped accused persons in escaping from conviction by granting them bails at interim stage of trials, as a result, the general public started losing confidence on the criminal justice system. A quick reading of most of the FIRs relating the incidents of murders all over Pakistan, provides a set pattern of the happening of incidents. The reader often comes across a stereotype story that involves accused along with his friends‘Shouted (lalkara) before firing upon the deceased. The presence of witnesses is normally in the form bystanders (mostly relatives or friends of the deceased). Afterwards, the fabricated stories and scenes crammed by the witnesses from both the sides, aware of their roles and responsibilities, will follow the rest of the process that is governed by rules of conviction. The public has lack of trust on police department andon the criminal justice system in Pakistan. A worst perception of police has developed in public, on the registration of FIR on the report of police officers, through various incidents of biased and fake registration of FIRs. This perception has gained more strength on the happenings of police encounters. The general public does not rely on the version of police whenever any incident of police encounter is reported, especially after the happening of police encounter in Naqibullah Mehsud case. The Supreme Court of Pakistan has acknowledged that performance of police is not considered as satisfactory by the general public in Pakistan. Therefore, the trust level of the general public remains very low on police, especially in situations of FIRs lodged on the report of police. 114 Review of Education, Administration and Law (REAL) Vol. 3, (1) 2020, 113-122 The lack of trust on police in the matter of lodging FIR on the report of police urged Mst. Sugran Bibi to file a (Human Rights) case in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. She prayed forordering the direction to local police for recording a second FIR contrary to police officials who allegedly murdered her son Mohsin Ali in a police encounter for which first FIR was registered on the report of the said police official. The Supreme Court went through not only the grounds of that petition but also put an end about confusion of a question of law on registering the second or multiple FIRs in same incident. The Supreme Court rejected the request and clarified the purpose of the registration of FIR. 2. Sughran Bibi Case 2.1 Facts of the Case Mst. Sughran Bibi filed a case under Article 184(3) of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973 in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. She requested he Supreme Court to exercise its original jurisdiction, considering and resolving the matter (Fundamental Human Right) as a question of public importance.She prayed for order of direction to local police to record a second FIR, contrary to FIR registered on the report of police officials, who had allegedly murdered her son Mohsin Ali in an encounter. Mohsin Ali who died in police encounter in case FIR No. 177 registered Sub-Inspector Zulfiqar, for the same incident, at Police Station Shahdara Town, District Lahore, on the same day. The charges of attempting to commit qatl-i-amd, assault/criminal force to halt the public servants from discharging their duties, voluntarily obstructing public servants in the discharge of their public functions, and keeping ammunition were put on Mohsin Ali and others in the FIR. Mohsin and others were alleged in that they commenced murderous attack upon a police party and in right of private defense the police party shoot back resulting the death of Mohsin Ali. The petitioner (Mst. Sughran Bibi, mother of Mohsin Ali deceased) as an alternate remedy filed a private complaint in respect of Mohsin Ali murder in the court of Additional Session Judge, Lahore. She alleged that police had cold-bloodedly murdered her son, Mohsin Ali, in a planned encounter. The court, on the base of prima facie evidence, summoned 16 accused police officers for trial. The petitioner, for the purpose of getting the accused police officers arrested, filed an application in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. A larger bench of seven judges of the Supreme Court was established to hear the case. 2.2 Judgement This case gave birth to the question of instituting a second FIR regarding new version in the same incident where FIR had already been registered in concerned police station. The Supreme Court, while declaring detailed judgment regarding filing of second FIR, rejected the necessity of filing a second or FIRs for any new-fangled report or version in the same incident. The court extensively looked into the matter by analyzing relevant case-law on the subject matter, elucidating the appropriate statutory law and discussing the nexus lying between the registration of FIR and the power of arrest given to police under the law.