In Hariprasad @ Kishan Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh [2023 INSC 986], the Supreme Court categorically stated that merely because there is some delay in lodging the First Information Report (FIR), it by itself ought not to be regarded by the courts in all cases as fatal to the prosecution.
A realistic and pragmatic approach must be adopted, considering the peculiarities of each case, to assess whether the unexplained delay in lodging the FIR was an afterthought to give a coloured version of the incident. If so, it is sufficient to corrode the credibility of the prosecution case. The delay has to be tested against other attending circumstances.
If on an overall consideration of all relevant circumstances it appears to the court that the delay in lodging the FIR has been explained, mere delay cannot be sufficient to disbelieve the prosecution case.
However, if the delay is not satisfactorily explained and it appears to the court that the cause for the delay was to frame anyone as an accused, then the delay should be considered as fatal to the prosecution case.
