JURISPRUDENCE OF CROSS FIRs
INTRODUCTION
A criminal case is an extremely serious affair where one has to jump through tons of hurdles and intricacies of the Indian legal system. A lot of times petty offences whose punishment would not be more than 1 year would stretch years and years in the courts. Much more serious offences are separately dealt in the courts and the first step in registering a new criminal case with the authorities is through a First Information Report (Hereinafter referred to as FIR).
An FIR is the primary step to the start of a very long and tedious criminal case. However, without this step it would not be possible to make out the facts of the case. It is through an FIR that the complainant registers a case and proceedings are started against the accused.
‘Audi Alteram Partem’ is a legal maxim that states that every person deserves a chance to be heard. This principle of natural justice is the reason why the accused is also given the right to file an FIR so that the court can heart both sides of the story.[1]
WHAT ARE CROSS/COUNTER FIRS?
A cross or counter FIR is a situation when two FIRs are registered before the police authorities for the same offence. These FIRs are filed by both the parties and the respective parties have their roles reversed in each other’s cases i.e., the accused becomes the complainant and the complainant becomes the accused. There are numerous reasons why cross FIRs are filed and some of them are mentioned below[2]:
- Personal Enmity: Usually a cross FIR is filed before the court due to hatred towards a particular person. This hatred can result in challenging a person’s FIR by filing another FIR.
- Confusing the court: Another reason why cross FIRs are filed is to confuse to court as to the true facts of the case. By filing two different FIRs, the court has to look at the case from two different point of views which can confuse the court and delay the proceedings
- Mala fide intention: The accused can also file a cross FIR if they want to look innocent in the eyes of the court. This transfers some of the blame to the other party and makes them the accused in another case which can prove their innocence
- Negotiating a settlement: Often, a second FIR is filed to push the complainant to withdraw the case and negotiate an out-of-court settlement which would prevent a long and tedious court case whose decision is unknown and indifferent to both the parties.
[Image Sources : Shutterstock]
SETTLED POSITION OF LAW
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[3](Hereinafter referred to as the CrPC) is the procedural law that deals with all the criminal cases in India. However, it does not contain any separate provisions relating to counter or cross cases.
The first counter criminal case which was filed in India dates back prior to the enforcement of the CrPC. In GoriparthiKrishtamma v. Emperor[4], the Madars High court expressed their concern for not having proper provisions to deal with counter cases. They further dealt with the case where both the parties would act as the innocent parties in each other’s cases. They further stated that both the cases must be heard by the same judge and in concurrence with one another so as to remove any doubt in the mind of the judge pronouncing the judgement[5].
It was In Nathi Lal v. State of UP[6], where the court finally came up with certain guidelines on how to deal with the issueof counter cases. These guidelines help the aggrieved parties while fighting two cases with the same set of facts. The guidelines were as follows:
- The two cases must be heard by the same judge
- The two cases must be heard in concurrence with one another
- Arguments made in the two cases cannot be cited inter-changeably and should be kept distinct.
- Two separate judgements should be pronounced
- The witnesses, arguments and evidences used in one case cannot be used while deciding the second case.
While there are no separate provisions in the CrPC which lay down rules regarding counter cases. The cases cited above set precedent on the courts that deal with the intricacies of cross FIRs.
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH CROSS FIRS
While precedence was set with cases like Goriparthi Krishtamma v. Emperor and Nathi Lal v. State of U.P. Counter cases have had some practical difficulties in the courts through the years. In Sudhir V. State of MP[7], one of the cases was triable by the Court of Sessions while the other party filed a cross FIR which led to another case registering before the Judicial magistrate. In such cases where the jurisdictions do not overlap and both the cases cannot be tried by the same magistrate, they have to be transferred to the Chief Judicial Magistrate. This not only increases the workload of the Chief but makes way for people to get their case tried by a senior judge which can affect the outcome of the case.
The Supreme Court in this instance stated that if two different cases have been filed before the court which deal with the same set of facts but they do not lie in the same jurisdiction then the court with the higher jurisdiction would take up both the cases and try them as counter cases before the same magistrate.
Another problem that arose before the courts was in in the cases where there are certain presumptions against the accused or where the provisions are not gender neutral. Let us take an example of two counter cases which can have varyingly different point of views. A has filed a case against B on the charge of rape while B has also filed a counter case against A for defamation under false pretences.
In such a situation, it is the duty of the police to conduct a thorough investigation before the two cases are heard before the court. The police are required to investigate both the sides and find the truth of the matter before they find any valuable evidence that can be presented before the court. The court then analyses the evidence and on the basis of this evidence they find out whose claim is stronger before disposing of one side of the story and continuing the case with the other side of the story that has been backed by substantial evidence.
CONCLUSION
Even though there are no separate provisions that govern cross cases, precedence has been set which lays down guidelines for the same. The cases clearly lay down the duties of everyone who is a party to the case.The police authorities have to file both the FIRs irrespective of malafide intention. Further it is the duty of thecourt to hear both cases and pronounce a judgement which are in consonance with one another.
While there are cases which lay down guidelines relating to cross FIRs, amendments can be to the CrPC as to add a chapter that deals with the procedural guidelines of cross cases. These provisions would not only help the courts in ease of dealing with these cases but make room for further amendments when and if required. It also reduces the need for the court to work on cross cases and establish burden of proof in both the cases.
Author: Sonakshi Pandey, A Student at Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us at support@ipandlegalfilings.com or IP & Legal Filing
[1] ‘What Happens If the Other Party Also Files a First Information Report’
<https://blog.ipleaders.in/if-the-other-party-also-files-the-fir/>>
[2]‘TRIAL OF CROSS CASES: ISSUES AND CHALLENGES’ <https://nja.gov.in/Cross%20Case%20registrar.pdf>
[3] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
[4]1929 SCC OnLine Mad 420
[5] ‘Challenges in Counter-Cases’ <https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2022/09/05/challenges-in-counter-cases/>
[6]1990 Supp SCC 145
[7](2001) 2 SCC 688
