Regarding FIR filed but Police is confusing with witnesses

998 votes

From the facts stated, there is no legal bar for the police to treat your niece as a witness merely because her name was mentioned in the FIR. An FIR is not an encyclopedia of evidence; it only sets the criminal law in motion. During investigation, the police are legally empowered under Section 161 CrPC to examine any person who appears to be acquainted with the facts of the case. Since the phone call was recorded lawfully and the clip was seized by the police, the statement contained in that recording is relevant evidence. The person who made that statement can be examined as a witness to prove the contents and context of the conversation, irrespective of whether she was named as a witness in the FIR. If you dispute her being shown as a witness, the proper remedy is not at the FIR stage but: To raise objections during trial at the stage of evidence, or To move an appropriate application before the Magistrate/Trial Court questioning the evidentiary value or voluntariness of the statement, or To challenge any procedural illegality, if committed, by filing a proper petition. Each case turns on its facts, the nature of the recording, and compliance with procedural law. A detailed examination of records and strategy at the investigation/trial stage is crucial to protect your rights and strengthen your case.

Advocate Atanu Patra LawRato

562 votes

Merely because a person is not named as a witness in the FIR does not bar the police from treating her as a witness. FIR is not an encyclopaedia. Under Section 161 CrPC, the Investigating Officer has the power to examine any person acquainted with the facts of the case. Since the recorded phone conversation was collected during investigation, the daughter can legally be treated as a witness. The correctness and evidentiary value of such testimony can only be tested during trial, not at the investigation stage.

Advocate Sudhankar Ghosh LawRato