On e-FIR – Move towards e-FIR, but with caution

Source: This post on e-FIR has been created based on the article “Move towards e-FIR, but with caution” published in The Hindu on 9^th November 2023.

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 2 Governance – E-governance – applications, models, successes, limitations, and potential.

News: This article discusses the concept of e-FIR. It also highlights the benefits and challenges associated with e-FIRs and suggests steps to tackle the same.

What is an e-FIR?

The concept of ‘e-FIR’ includes obtaining information/complaint through electronic means using a common national portal and then getting the information/complaint signed by the complainant physically within a stipulated time to convert the complaint into an actual FIR.

Read more about First Information Report (FIR) here.

What does the Law Commission say about e-FIR?

Law Commission of India Report No. 282 recommended that “in cases where the accused is not known, registration of an e-FIR should be allowed for all cognisable offences”.

If the accused is known, as a preliminary step, registration of an e-FIR may be allowed for cognisable offences wherein the punishment provided under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and other laws is up to 3 years.

In other cases (punishable with more than 3 years of imprisonment), the conventional method prescribed under the IPC needs to be followed.

In the next step, the police officer is required to get the signature of the complainant within 3 days to register an e-FIR. Otherwise, the e-FIR shall not be registered.

Read about Cognizable Vs Non-Cognizable Offences here.

What are the benefits of e-FIR?

First, the police will have to take cognisance of the complaint as the system will automatically generate receipt. This will ensure almost free registration of crime.

Second, the police will not be able to change the contents of the complaint.

What are the issues with the debate around e-FIR?

1. Lack of clarity and awareness: The Commission has not clarified the concept of an ‘e-FIR’ in detail. The procedure in the report is given only for cases where the accused is known.
2. State models not discussed: Though the Commission mentioned that 8 States are lodging an e-FIR, it did not discuss any of the models adopted by those States.
3. No automatic registration of FIR: ‘e-FIR’ does not mean an automatic registration of an FIR using electronic means.
4. Lack of e-authentication technique: In case a paper-based signed complaint is to be replaced by an equivalent document in electronic form, one must affix electronic signature or use an e-authentication technique, for instance, like the one notified in the IT Act, 2000.
   However, the Commission has not discussed using the ‘e-authentication technique or digital signature’ as defined in the IT Act, 2000, for signing complaints.

What should be done?

1. Mandating an e-authentication technique: It would be better if the use of an e-authentication technique is mandated for the verification of complainant.
2. Immediate registering of an e-FIR through e-authentication (and not the current delay of 3 days, which may impact the case).

Question for practice:

Critically examine the role of E-FIRs in tackling the challenges of registration of FIRs.