उच्चतम न्यायालय ने हरेन्द्र राय बनाम बिहार राज्य के मामले में पूर्व सांसद प्रभुनाथ सिंह को हत्या का दोषी ठहराते हुए यह व्यवस्था दी कि भारतीय साक्ष्य अधिनियम की धारा 32(1) के अंतर्गत घायल व्यक्ति द्वारा दर्ज प्राथमिकी (FIR) को मृत्युकालिक कथन (dying declaration) माना जा सकता है तथा धारा 74 के तहत प्राथमिकी एक लोक दस्तावेज (public document) है।
While hearing the matter of Harendra Rai vs. The State of Bihar, the Supreme Court of India stated that the FIR (First Information Report) is a public document as per Section 74 of the Evidence Act. The Supreme Court bench, while convicting leader of the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) and former member of parliament Prabhunath Singh for the murders, stated that “the FIR lodged on the basis of Bayan Tahrir of injured Rajendra Rai (deceased) is liable to be treated as a dying declaration, which itself is a substantive piece of evidence and is admissible under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act.” The matter was heard by a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, and Justice Vikram Nath.
During the court proceedings of the above-mentioned case, one of the issues raised was “Whether the FIR or Bayan Tahriri can be said to be proved as a piece of reliable prosecution evidence and if so, what would be the position of law on the issue of treating the FIR or Bayan Tahriri as the Dying Declaration?” The bench stated that “in this respect, various earlier pronouncements of this Court have clarified the position of law that the statement by an injured person recorded as FIR can be treated as a dying declaration and such a statement is admissible under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act. It was also held that the dying declaration must not cover the whole incident or narrate the case history. Corroboration is not necessary for this situation; a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction.”
Along with this, the bench also referred to various judgments of the High Court to determine whether FIR is a public document. The Supreme Court observed that “This Court endorses the above view and holds that FIR is a public document defined under Section 74 of the Evidence Act.”