State Of U.P. vs Peera @ Mavali & Others on 20 August, 2018
In this case the FIR has became doubtful due to being ante time in such circumstances examination of scribed was necessary Hon'ble High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in Criminal Revision No. 80 of 1999 in Gokula Naik Vs. State of Orissa 2016 SCC OnLine Ori 819 has held that "No doubt, the non-examination of the scribe of the first information report cannot be a ground to doubt the prosecution case and it can at best be treated as mere irregularity which can be cured if it is otherwise proved but in the case in hand, when neither the scribe of the F.I.R. has been examined nor the F.I.R. has been otherwise proved, it reflects against the credibility of the prosecution case at the threshold." The facts of this Ruling are similar to the present case because in the present case also neither the scribe is examined nor the Head Constable concerned who prepared chick is examined and FIR is registered within 20 minutes of the occurrence which is not possible as discussed above. In this case the examination of Naresh was necessary to show that where and at what time he scribe FIR and how much time was taken by him in scribing the FIR. So in this case non examination of scribe Naresh reflects against credibility of the prosecution case.