LUCKNOW (1 March 2026) — The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court has ruled that the credibility of a First Information Report (FIR) cannot be dismissed or doubted simply because it was prepared with the assistance of a lawyer. A division bench comprising Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary clarified that seeking legal aid is a permissible right at every stage of criminal proceedings, including the initial act of reporting a crime.
Key Judicial Observations
The ruling came during the hearing of a criminal appeal filed by Jagdamba Harijan, who was challenging his conviction in a decade-old acid attack case. The defense had argued that the FIR was unreliable because it was drafted by a private advocate and filed with a two-day delay.
The court rejected these contentions, noting:
- Access to Legal Aid: The bench observed that if legal assistance is allowed throughout a trial, there can be no “embargo” on seeking help from an advocate at the stage of lodging an FIR.
- Illiterate Informants: The court specifically noted that the complainant in this case was an “illiterate villager” who had just witnessed a horrific crime. It was deemed natural for such a person to seek assistance from a literate individual—even a lawyer—to ensure a clear narration of facts.
- Prioritising Treatment: Regarding the delay, the court held that prioritising the medical treatment of the victims was a natural and necessary response that should not be used to “jettison the evidence” of the prosecution.
Verdict: Conviction Upheld, Sentence Modified
While the High Court upheld the conviction of Jagdamba Harijan for the 2014 acid attack that killed a mother and her daughter-in-law in Pratapgarh, it modified the trial court’s order.
| Original Sentence (2018) | High Court Modification (2026) |
| Life Imprisonment | 14 Years Rigorous Imprisonment |
| Fines & Other Charges | Maintained |
The court showed leniency by reducing the life sentence to a fixed term of 14 years, citing the appellant’s lack of prior criminal history and the fact that he had already spent nearly 13 years and 10 months in custody (including remissions) as of late 2025.
Context of the Crime
The incident occurred in May 2014, when the appellant allegedly poured sulphuric acid on two women while they were sleeping. The medical and forensic evidence confirmed that the victims died from septicaemia caused by deep acid burns exceeding 50% of their bodies. The court affirmed that the prosecution had successfully proved the charges under Sections 304 (culpable homicide), 326A (acid attack), and 452 (house-trespass) of the IPC.
Sources
- Bar & Bench: “FIR’s credibility not affected merely because it was lodged with lawyer’s assistance: Allahabad HC” (28 February 2026)
- Press Trust of India (PTI): “Preparation of FIR with lawyer’s help does not automatically affect its credibility…” (1 March 2026)
- The Times of India: “FIR drafted by a lawyer credible: Allahabad High Court” (2 March 2026)
- Verdictum: “Jagdamba Harijan v. State of UP: Neutral Citation 2026:AHC-LKO:11040” (February 2026)
Leave a Reply