8. State of Karnataka Vs. Moin Patel, AIR 1996 SC 3041
Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the normal rule is that prosecution has to explain delay and lack of prejudice does not apply per se to rape cases, vide.
In State of Karnataka v. Moin Patel (6), Hon'ble Supreme Court indicated that if in a case it is found that FIR was recorded without delay and the investigation started on that FIR then however improper or objectionable the delayed receipt of the report by the Magistrate is concerned, it cannot by itself justify the conclusion that the investigation was tainted and the prosecution unsupportable.
In the case of State of Karnataka v. Moin Patel reported at A.I.R. 1996 S.C. 3045, it was held that relying on the decision of the case of Pala Singh v. State of Punjab reported at 1972 S.C. 2679, where the F.I.R. was recorded promptly and the investigation started on that F.I.R. the delayed receipt by the Magistrate is, by itself cannot justify the conclusion that investigation was tainted and prosecution was unsupportable.
14. This Court further in State of Karnataka v. Moin Patel, (1996) 8 SCC 167 : 1996 SCC (Cri) 632 : AIR 1996 SC 3041 stated vis-a-vis the issue of delay in dispatch of FIR as below (para 16) :--