FIR is not a substantive evidence it can be used during trial ........

Indian Evidence Act (IEA) 1872 Examination of Witnesses

Download Solution PDF

FIR is not a substantive evidence it can be used during trial

to corroborate the informant

to contradict the informant

both (a) & (b)

neither (a) nor (b)

Explanation:

Let’s break this down:

- FIR (First Information Report) isn’t substantive evidence. It’s not proof of the facts—basically, you can’t use it to directly convict someone.

- What you can do with FIR is use it during trial for limited purposes related to the person who gave it (the informant).

- Option 1: To corroborate the informant. Yes, you can use FIR to support the statement of the person who filed it—if what they said earlier matches what they say now, it backs them up.

- Option 2: To contradict the informant. Also true. If the informant gave one version in the FIR and another in court, FIR can be used to show they changed their story.

- Option 3: Both (a) & (b). Here’s what’s key: both supporting (corroborating) and challenging (contradicting) the informant are allowed purposes in court.

- Option 4: Neither. That’s not accurate—FIR can definitely play those two roles.

So the correct answer is:

Option 3: Both (a) & (b).