The Supreme Court of India held that an FIR cannot be disbelieved merely because it is registered based on a police officer’s statement instead of a direct complaint by the victim, while cancelling anticipatory bail granted to the accused in an SC/ST Act case.
Key Observations
The Court clarified that the source of the FIR (police or victim) is secondary—what matters is whether the allegations disclose a prima facie offence.
It held that FIRs based on police information are legally valid and cannot be dismissed at the threshold on that ground alone.
The Bench found that materials on record, including investigation and witness statements, indicated a prima facie case under the SC/ST Act.
Case Background
The FIR was reportedly registered by the police based on information/video evidence of caste-based abuse and violence.
The High Court had granted anticipatory bail to the accused, questioning the FIR since it was not directly lodged by the victim.
Supreme Court’s Decision
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran set aside the High Court’s order and cancelled the anticipatory bail, directing the accused to surrender.
Legal Principle
An FIR is not invalid merely because it is based on a police statement; if a prima facie offence exists—especially under the SC/ST Act—courts should be cautious in granting anticipatory bail.
