KSLU Solved Question Papers
Criminal Law II
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 7
2017 Jun Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 7 Criminal Law II 2017 Jun Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2017 Jun examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2017 Jun examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2017 Jun examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 13 questions answered
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1Examine the procedure for recording First Information Report. Discuss the evidentiary value of FIR and the effect of delay in lodging the FIR.[16]
Answer
For full marks, cover: what a first information report is (section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which never uses the phrase); the procedure for recording it, step by step, with the special rules for women and disabled persons, the free copy, the remedies on refusal (section 154(3) and section 156(3)), and the report to the Magistrate (section 157); its evidentiary value: not substantive evidence, but usable to corroborate or contradict its maker, and in a few cases as substantive evidence; the effect of delay in lodging it, with the leading cases (Meharaj Singh, Gian Chand, Dharma Rama Bhagare); a table; the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; a conclusion.
What the first information report is
The first information report (FIR) is the first information about a cognizable offence given to the officer in charge of a police station. It is recorded under section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Code does not use the words "first information report". The name comes from practice: it is the earliest report that sets the criminal law in motion.
A cognizable offence is one for which the police may arrest without a warrant, such as murder, rape or theft. For a non-cognizable offence, section 155 applies instead. The officer only enters the substance in a book and refers the informant to the Magistrate.
The procedure for recording it
- Who may give it. Anyone may give the information: the victim, a relative, a witness, a stranger, or even the offender. It need not name the accused or give every detail.
- Oral information is written down. If the information is given orally, the officer must reduce it to writing, himself or under his direction.
- Read over and signed. The written information is read over to the informant. Whether written by him or for him, it "shall be signed by the person giving it".
- Entered in the book. The substance is entered in a book kept in the form the State Government prescribes. In practice this is the FIR register.
- Women victims. A proviso added in 2013 covers offences such as acid attack, sexual harassment, stalking or rape. Information from the woman concerned must be recorded by a woman police officer.
- Disabled victims. Under the second proviso, if the victim is mentally or physically disabled, the information is recorded at her residence or a place of her choice. An interpreter or special educator is present, and the recording is videographed.
- A free copy (section 154(2)). A copy of the FIR is given "forthwith, free of cost" to the informant.
- Report to the Magistrate (section 157(1)). The officer must "forthwith" send a report to the Magistrate empowered to take cognizance. He then goes to the spot, or sends a subordinate, to investigate.
When the police refuse to record it
The officer has no discretion. If the information discloses a cognizable offence, registration is mandatory. The Constitution Bench in Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh said so, allowing only a short preliminary inquiry in a few listed kinds of cases. If he still refuses:
- Section 154(3). The informant may send the substance in writing, by post, to the Superintendent of Police. If satisfied, he investigates himself or directs a subordinate to do so.
- Section 156(3). The informant may ask a Magistrate to order the police to register and investigate.
- A complaint (section 200). He may also file a complaint directly before a Magistrate.
The evidentiary value of the FIR
- Not substantive evidence. The FIR is not evidence of the facts it states. It is a statement made to the police before the trial, not on oath, and not tested by cross-examination.
- To corroborate its maker. Under section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, an earlier statement may corroborate the informant's evidence in court. A prompt FIR consistent with his testimony adds to its weight.
- To contradict its maker. Under section 145 of that Act, the informant may be cross-examined on the FIR to bring out contradictions and omissions. A material omission, such as an eye-witness's name, may weaken the prosecution story.
- Only against its maker. It cannot be used to contradict or corroborate other witnesses.
- When it becomes substantive evidence. If the informant dies of the injuries described, the FIR may be admitted as a dying declaration under section 32(1). It may also be part of the same transaction under section 6.
- An FIR by the accused. If the accused lodges it, any confession in it to a police officer is barred by section 25. Non-confessional parts may be used, for example to prove his conduct or presence.
The effect of delay
The FIR is valued because it comes early, before there is time to think, consult or invent. Delay takes away that value.
- Delay is not fatal in itself. The court does not reject a case only because the FIR was late.
- Delay puts the court on guard. It asks whether the prosecution has explained the delay, and whether the explanation is believable.
- An unexplained delay may be fatal. It is so where it gave time for embellishment, false implication or the addition of witnesses.
- Accepted explanations. Courts have accepted the distance to the police station, the informant's injuries or shock, care of the injured, and fear. In sexual offences, they accept the family's hesitation and concern for honour.
- External checks. The court also looks at when the Magistrate received the report under section 157. It checks whether the FIR's number and details appear in the inquest report. A late special report suggests the FIR was written later and ante-timed, that is, shown as recorded earlier than it was.
The leading cases
Facts. In Meharaj Singh v. State of U.P., (1994) 5 SCC 188, decided on 21 April 1994, a man was shot and stabbed at about 11 a.m. while loading his cart near the fields. The trial court found the FIR ante-timed and acquitted the accused. The High Court reversed and convicted two of them.
Held. The FIR in a murder case is "a vital and valuable piece of evidence". Its object is "to obtain the earliest information" about the crime, the culprits, the weapons and the eye-witnesses. "Delay in lodging the FIR often results in embellishment, which is a creature of an after thought." The copy reached the Magistrate late, and the inquest report held no details of the FIR. So the FIR "has lost its value and authenticity", and the appellants were acquitted.
Why it bears. It explains why delay matters, and how courts test whether an FIR was really recorded when it claims to be.
Facts. In State of Himachal Pradesh v. Gian Chand, (2001) 6 SCC 71, decided on 1 May 2001, a girl of five and a half was raped. The family first complained to the accused's father, a relative, and tried to settle the matter at home. Only when that failed did she go alone to the police, with the village Panch's support. The High Court acquitted, calling the delay unexplained.
Held. "Delay in lodging the FIR cannot be used as a ritualistic formula for doubting the prosecution case." If the delay is explained to the court's satisfaction, it cannot by itself discredit the case. It becomes fatal only if it is unexplained and there is a chance of embellishment. The conviction was restored.
Why it bears. It shows the other side of delay: a natural explanation saves the prosecution.
Facts. In Dharma Rama Bhagare v. State of Maharashtra, (1973) 1 SCC 537, decided on 13 December 1972, the accused was part of a mob that attacked a family near Tansa lake in May 1970. He shot arrows that killed three of them. A son of the family, himself badly injured, lodged the FIR. It differed from the evidence of three other eye-witnesses.
Held. The FIR "is never treated as a substantive piece of evidence". It can be used only "for corroborating or contradicting its maker". It "can by no means be utilised for contradicting, or discrediting the other witnesses". The conviction stood.
Why it bears. It fixes the limits of the FIR's evidentiary value.
The FIR at a glance
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Which section? | Section 154 (cognizable offences) |
| Who records it? | The officer in charge of the police station |
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What must he do? | Write it down, read it over, take the signature, enter the substance, give a free copy |
| Is it substantive evidence? | No, except as a dying declaration or part of the same transaction |
| Whom can it corroborate or contradict? | Only its maker |
| Is delay fatal? | Only if unexplained and it allows embellishment |
Criticism
Police stations still turn informants away, or record a diluted version, despite Lalita Kumari. Informants who are poor or frightened rarely use section 154(3). Ante-timing is hard to prove. On the other hand, a strict view of delay would punish victims, especially of sexual offences, for hesitation that is natural. The case law balances both concerns by testing the explanation, not the clock.
Under the Sanhita
From 1 July 2024, section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 replaces section 154. Information may now be given "by electronic communication", to be signed within three days. It may be given "irrespective of the area where the offence is committed", which is the zero FIR. The free copy goes to "the informant or the victim". For offences punishable with three to seven years, section 173(3) allows a preliminary enquiry of fourteen days, with a Deputy Superintendent's permission. Section 176 replaces section 157. Sections 145 and 157 of the Evidence Act are now sections 148 and 160 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
Conclusion. The FIR is the first record of a cognizable offence. Section 154 requires it to be written down, read over, signed, entered in a book and copied free to the informant. Section 157 sends it to the Magistrate. It is not substantive evidence. It can only corroborate or contradict its maker, as Dharma Rama Bhagare holds, unless it becomes a dying declaration. Delay does not defeat a case by itself, as Gian Chand holds. But an unexplained delay that opens the door to embellishment destroys the FIR's value, as it did in Meharaj Singh.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 7 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.