Close this search box.

Changing Contours Of FIR

Share Article


Envision a particular person going for walks down to a law enforcement chowki and insisting to lodge an FIR (Very first Information Report) in opposition to pilferage of commodities ranging from Pajamas to orange, the yawning guy in uniform posted in the chowki would get more than enough motive to ludicrously laugh at the complainer and subsequently, thrash him out of the station. Though, the regulation of land persists that law enforcement ought to sign-up each and every single complain coming its way, in today’s circumstance such petty crimes do not get registered. A paradigm change in the mother nature of criminal offense around the time can be pointed to be the primary motive for it. Criminology has stooped to such vociferous degrees that even law enforcement have to acquire a tricky journey even to comprehend the nature of the criminal offense.

To a wonderful extent, FIRs are the candid portrayal of the mother nature of the crime fully commited in a unique era, which in switch, narrates the widespread social norms of the culture to some extent. Headlines India will take you into a chronological ride of several FIRs lodged in sporadic police stations(PS) of Delhi, starting off from the first of its form.

The initially FIR of Delhi was lodged accurately one particular hundred and forty-six years ago, with Subzi Mandi Police Station on Oct 18, 1861. The FIRs at that time have been created in Urdu and the justices were delivered within just a week’s time. It reads as follows: “Utensils & Outfits Theft”, FIR no and Part (unidentified) underneath Law enforcement Station Subzi Mandi experienced lodged that one Maiyuddin son of Mohammad Yar Khan resident of Katra Sheesh Mahal said that 3 Degcha, 3 Degchi, a Katora, a Kulfi, a Hukka and some ladies’ garments well worth 45 annas were being stolen from his residence in the night time.

Other FIRs of that era:

Dated: February 16,1891.Criticism – “Theft Of 11 Oranges Really worth 2 Annas” FIR no-125, Part 379 IPC, beneath Subzi Mandi Police Station recorded that Ram Baksh s/o Allah Balsh together with his 4-5 accomplices stole 11oranges of Ram Prasad s/o Deen Singh, the complainant caught him alongside with the oranges with the help of Chajju ram and was introduced to Law enforcement Station. The Court Verdict: 1 month RI (23-12-1891).

Dated: April 30, 1895.Criticism- “Theft of a Tattu (Mule)” FIR no- 44, Area 381 IPC beneath Subzi Mandi PS lodged that Moka s/o Nanwa complained his tattu was stolen by Fula Jat, who was his former servant. The Court Verdict: Untraced (16-05-1895).

Dated: March 10, 1897. Complaint- “Theft of Pyjamas Worth 8 Annas” FIR no. 6, Segment 36, 380 IPC below PS Subzi Mandi registered that the Pyjamas of Jyoti s/o Chuhe Mal was stolen by Ram Dayal Tufal s/o Kallu, when he was interrogated, he promised to provide it from house but he did not turn up. Later he was arrested with Pyjamas. The courtroom Verdict: Awarded 5 lashes.(15-03-1897).

Dated: September 20, 1898.Grievance- “Theft Of Hukka Worthy of Rs 5” FIR no- 6, Area 39, 379 IPC underneath Nangloi Police Station observed that Badlu, s/o Dana Jat noted, that he was lying on a charpai (cot) in the chaupal. Harnam arrived and took away his Hukka. When he saw him operating, he ran right after him and caught him after about 500 ways from chaupal. The Court verdict: 2 weeks R.I. (27-09-1898).

One more one lodged on October 18, 1894 soon after practically 20 years – “Choose Pocket of 4 Annas” FIR no-125, Section 379 IPC, underneath Subzi Mandi Law enforcement Station registered that Tulsi, s/o Sabi Jat described, that Harvender had taken out 4 annas from his pocket and was caught crimson-handed by Jeet. The Courtroom pronounced 2 decades RI to the accused as he was a habitual offender. The verdict arrived on December 19, 1894. Only soon after a single and 50 % thirty day period, which is pretty much paradoxical in modern lawful procedure which is flourishing challenging for a speedy justice shipping and delivery system.

In a different incident on June 22, 1899, an FIR was lodged pertaining to theft of Quran Sharif. “Theft of Quran Sharif” FIR no 15, Area-380 IPC less than PS Mehrauli recorded that Alladiya mentioned that past night time Guttu arrived to the Mosque and instructed that he had been transformed to Muslim and preferred to go to Ajmer Sharif, so he requested for support. He was donated funds and meals. He stayed that evening at the Mosque and walked away with the Quran Sharif. Eventually he was caught him from a shop. The verdict of one particular 7 days of imprisonment was pronounced on July 12, 1899.