Introduction
India is a fast-growing nation, both economically and population wise, with limitless potential and aspirations which cannot be assumed. While this is a good, history of other nations with similar aspirations and speed shows us that there are challenges that this fast-growing nation will have to face while it is on the path to become a great power. For India to come out victorious from this, India will have to address the problems that come with such speed by modifying its law and order in a way that it can catch up and address challenges associated with the speed of growth. For this very reason our lawmakers proposed the concept of “Zero FIR” to be inserted in our Criminal Laws concerning registering of First Information Report (FIR), that was present previously.
This blog shall explore the
intricacies of the concept of Zero FIR, tracing its legislative foundation in
court verdicts and legislative procedures. It shall also examine the historical
context and judicial support that led to the formal recognition of the concept
of Zero FIR. We shall be also understanding as to how the concept of Zero FIR
was brought in BNSS and key aspects for comprehending how it is intended to
function under BNSS and the challenges associated with its non-intended use.
For all the law students,
civilians and advocates, this will be an interesting case study with reference
to the question of how a few words added or subtracted in a law can drastically
change or modify the power and effects of that law. We shall also be answering
some frequently asked questions on this topic of Zero FIR. So let’s start.
FIR with respect to provisions under CrPC.
The concept of ZERO FIR under the
Code of Criminal Procedure was a concept that was came from the interpretations
of our judiciary and their verdicts over time but was not present expressly
with the term “Zero FIR” being mentioned over it. But as the Hon’ble Apex Court
and various other courts of law in our country interpreted before, the concept
was present in our laws when seen in conjunction with provisions of our
Constitution of India, may it be one’s fundamental right to get justice or
power of courts to deliver justice.
It allows victims of crime to
report offences at any police station in the country, regardless of
jurisdictional boundaries, ensuring immediate action and documentation. This
provision addresses a critical issue where police officers would refuse to
register complaints citing jurisdictional limitations of the Police Station and
thereby delaying justice and increasing victim’s distress. By enabling FIRs to
be registered at any police station, Zero FIR eliminates these barriers and reduces
the hassle faced by a victim in such situations and further streamlines the
process of seeking justice.
Historical Preview
The concept of Zero FIR is not
new to the Indian criminal legal system. In 2015, the Ministry of Home Affairs
issued an advisory suggesting the registration of Zero FIRs for crimes against
women. The judiciary has also emphasized the importance of Zero FIRs in several
landmark cases
It all started with the term Zero
FIR being coined based on the recommendations of the Justice Verma Committee
which was constituted in December 2012, following the horrific Nirbhaya
gang rape case in Delhi. The committee was chaired by Justice J.S. Verma,
former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, along with Justice Leila
Seth, former judge of the High Court, and Gopal Subramanium, former Solicitor
General of India. This committee’s recommendations led to the Criminal Law
Amendment Act, 2013, which introduced the concept of Zero FIR. I personally am
proud to state that when I was in the last year of my law school, and being
affected mentally by this infamous case, I had proposed some changes in the
laws to the committee, in form of a draft legislation at the time.
Other Key
Recommendations
The committee submitted its
report on January 23, 2013, and made several recommendations to strengthen laws
related to sexual assault, harassment, trafficking, and child sexual abuse.
Some of the key recommendations included:
- Expansion of the Definition of Rape: The
committee recommended that the definition of rape should include all forms
of non-consensual penetration, not just penetration of the vagina, mouth,
or anus. This widened the scope of criminal law provisions in Indian Penal
Code, which previously had to curtail their scope and could not be used in
such situations because of such loopholes.
- Removal of Marital Rape Exception: The
committee suggested that the exception for marital rape should be removed.
The committee recommended that marriage should not automatically imply
consent. There should be express consent even in case of marriages, and
the victim or the offender/ accused shall not be treated any differently
just because he/ she is married to the other person.
- Introduction of Zero FIR: To address
jurisdictional barriers and expedite the investigation process, the
committee recommended the introduction of the concept of Zero FIR.
- Enhanced Punishments: The committee proposed
enhanced punishments for sexual assault and other related crimes.
- Protection of Women in Conflict Areas:
Recommendations to review the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA)
and appoint special commissioners to monitor offenses in conflict areas.
- Reforms in Case Management: Setting up Rape
Crisis Cells, increasing police accountability, and allowing online FIR
filing.
Impact and Implementation
The recommendations of the
Justice Verma Committee led to the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, which
incorporated many of the suggested changes. The introduction of Zero FIR was a
significant step towards ensuring timely registration of crimes and expediting
the investigative process. Today, we see with the implementation of the New
Criminal laws in the form of BNSS, BNS and BSA, many of these recommendations
have found place in the official document and provision which shall lead to
better implementation of these provisions and obtaining the end result in a timebound
manner.
Leading Case Laws with respect to Evolution of concept of Zero FIR
- State of Andhra Pradesh vs. Punati Ramulu andOthers (1993): The court held that lack of territorial jurisdiction should not prevent the recording of information about a cognizable offense and forwarding it to the appropriate police station.
- Satvinder Kaur vs. Government of NCT, Delhi (1999): The Supreme Court ruled that even if the investigating officer finds that the offense did not occur within his jurisdiction, he should forward the case to the appropriate magistrate.
- The Nirbhaya Case (2012): The Justice Verma Committee recommended the introduction of Zero FIR to address jurisdictional barriers and expedite the investigation process.
- The Kathua Rape Case (2018): The case underscored the necessity of Zero FIR to prevent procedural delays and ensure timely justice.
- The Disha Rape and Murder Case (2019): This case highlighted the importance of Zero FIR in ensuring immediate action and documentation of serious crimes.
To be continued in Part 2
____________________________________________________________
Sources/ References :
___________________________________________________________________
Related Blogs:
Protest Petition: Seeking Justice Beyond the Police Report
Complaint Cases under Section 223 BNSS/ 200CrPC: An In-Depth Analysis
Perspective Dive: Is There Need To Further Change Laws To Ensure Women Safety In Our Country?
Unveiling the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS): A Legal Revolution Unfolding
___________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer:
This Article/essay provides general information and does not constitute legal
advice. Consult a qualified legal professional for specific cases.
Tip: If
you find this Article to be of any relevance, please feel free to give your
feedback to the author via commenting below. Consider following my blog. For
any query or suggestions, you can email the author at support@legalprobe.in
___________________________________________________________________
){kind=link}
0 Comments