text stringlengths 5 5.67k |
|---|
It was further submitted that the alleged eye-witnesses of the occurrence were examined by the police belatedly and that the medical evidence adduced in the case does not in any manner support the ocular evidence and if at all it would not be a case of culpable homicide amounting to murder but a case of culpable homici... |
He also submitted that if two views are possible and if there are lacunae in the case of the prosecution, the benefit must go to the accused ARG |
He next submitted that there was no evidence on record as to when the FIR reached the Magistrate and that none of the courts below considered the said aspect ARG |
He submitted that since there was violation of the provisions of S. 162 of the CrPC, the accused-appellant is liable to be acquitted ARG |
Ms. A. Subhashini, learned counsel appearing for the respondent- State, however, strenuously submitted that none of the aforesaid submissions could be accepted by this Court as it is a foolproof case of conviction of the appellant u/s ARG |
302 IPC Ratio |
She submitted that the High Court rightly interfered with the order of acquittal passed by the trial court after critically examining the evidence on record ARG |
It was submitted by her that the trial court examined the evidence in the present case in a very summary and cryptic manner and thereby arrived at a wrong conclusion that the accused persons were required to be acquitted ARG |
She has drawn our attention to the findings recorded by the High Court while setting aside the order of acquittal observing that the evidence of eye-witnesses namely PWs ARG |
1, 2, 8 and 18 is convincing and reliable but so far as the evidence of PW-4 is concerned, the High Court has made an observation that he is not a reliable witness ARG |
Counsel for the respondent has, therefore, taken us through the evidence of PWs ARG |
1, 2, 8 and 18 and on the basis thereof submitted that their evidence clearly prove and establish the role of the appellant herein in stabbing the deceased with the knife which he had brought from the other room with the intention of killing the deceased and, therefore, it is a clear case of conviction ARG |
u/s ARG |
In the light of the aforesaid submissions of the counsel appearing for the parties we have given our in-depth consideration to the facts of the present case Ratio |
The starting point of the incident in question as indicated from the evidence on record is the hall where apparently a dispute started between the parties with regard to the electricity connection in the house Ratio |
The deceased tried to put off the light of one particular room at which the appellant and other accused persons became annoyed and the appellant switched on the light which was again switched off by the deceased Ratio |
At this, the deceased became annoyed and the appellant removed the fuse of the electricity which act of his plunged the entire house into darkness Ratio |
It is also clear and established that thereafter a lamp was brought by Accused No. 3 to the room besides another lamp which was already burning in the said room itself Ratio |
But, in any case, there was an electricity light post in the front of the house which was giving enough light to the house Ratio |
There is also evidence on record to show that even outsiders were watching the incident from the road which indicates that there was sufficient light for them to see what was happening in the house where the incident had taken place Ratio |
There was indeed some scuffle between the parties during the course of which Accused No. 1 received simple injuries and the deceased died of the two stab injuries inflicted by the present appellant Ratio |
The said fact is proved by the evidence of PWs Ratio |
2, 8, 18 and the complainant herself (PW-1 Ratio |
The deceased was taken to the hospital and while so taken he died Ratio |
PW-21 who was at that time attached to Konda Police Station as PSI was informed at about 10.45 p.m. that the deceased while was being brought in the police jeep by a police constable Jaisingrao Rane and was being taken to the Government Medical College but before the deceased could be admitted he died Ratio |
PW-21 was also informed by said by said PSI K.K. Desai of Panaji Police Station that it was a case of assault and that the incident had taken place at verandah and that the said matter pertains to his police station and, therefore, he should take appropriate action Ratio |
On receiving the said message he went to the place of occurrence along with PSI K.K. Desai and upon reaching the place of occurrence at 11.30 p.m. he found the entire place plunged in total darkness Ratio |
Therefore, he proceeded to survey the place of occurrence with the help of torches Ratio |
He, in his deposition specifically stated that he found that the back door as well as the front door of the house were latched from inside and in front of the house there was a road where there was an electricity pole and there was a street tube light by which the house could be visible and even the lights of the vehic... |
He stated that although the house had electricity connection, but was not having the electricity supply Ratio |
He gave instructions to his subordinate and also to the people around that nobody should touch any article lying at the scene of occurrence Ratio |
He stated that he made preliminary enquiry and brought Yashoda and her two daughters to the police station and sent two other officers in search of Accused Nos Ratio |
1 and 2 who were not found in the house Ratio |
He also stated that he got the complaint registered at the police station which was lodged by PW-1 and that on the next day he again went to the scene of offence and seized the properties involved in the crime which were sealed Ratio |
He also recovered the knife at the instance of accused Sharmila which he seized Ratio |
On 28.04.1988, that is, after about 9 days of the incident, Accused Nos Ratio |
1 and 2 surrendered before the police and on their surrender they were taken into custody Ratio |
It was found that Accused No. 1 was having injury on his back Ratio |
and he was medically examined Ratio |
On medical examination his injury was found to be simple Ratio |
Learned counsel appearing for the appellant was critical of the manner in which PW-21 initiated the investigation without recording any G.D. entry and without getting any FIR recorded ARG |
He submitted that since the investigation in the instant case was started by the police without recording an FIR, such an FIR is necessarily hit by the provisions of S. 162 of the Cr ARG |
P.C ARG |
He next submitted that no evidence having been led by the prosecution about the time when the FIR reached the Magistrate, therefore, there is also violation of the provisions of S. 157 of the Cr ARG |
The issue with regard to the initiation of the investigation without recording the FIR was succinctly addressed by this Court in the case of State of U.P. v. Bhagwant Kishore Joshi, (1964) 3 SCR 71 1963 Indlaw SC 268, observed as follows: "17 PRE |
What is investigation is not defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure; but in H.N. Rishbud and Inder Singh v. State of Delhi 1954 Indlaw SC 14 this Court has described, the procedure, for investigation as follows: "Thus, under the Code investigation consists generally of the following steps, (1) Proceeding to the spot... |
This Court, however, has not said that if a police officer takes merely one or two of the steps indicated by it, what he has done must necessarily be regarded as investigation PRE |
Investigation, in substance, means collection of evidence relating to the commission of the offence PRE |
The Investigating Officer is, for this purpose, entitled to question persons who, in this opinion, are able to throw light on the offence which has been committed and is likewise entitled to question the suspect and is entitled to reduce the statements of persons questioned by him to writing PRE |
He is also entitled to search the place of the offence and to search other places with the object of seizing articles connected with the offence PRE |
No doubt, for this purpose he has to proceed to the spot where the offence was committed and do various other things PRE |
But the main object of investigation being to bring home the offence to the offender the essential part of the duties of an investigating officer in this connection is, apart from arresting the offender, to collect all material necessary for establishing the accusation against the offender PRE |
Merely making some preliminary enquire upon receipt of information from an anonymous source or a source of doubtful reliability for checking up the correctness of the information does not amount to collection of evidence and so cannot be regarded as investigation PRE |
In the absence of any prohibition in the Code, express or implied, I am of opinion that it is open to a police officer to make preliminary enquiries before registering an offence and making a full scale investigation into it PRE |
No doubt, Section 5-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act was enacted for preventing harassment to a government servant and with this object in view investigation, except with the previous permission of a Magistrate, is not permitted to be made by an officer below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police PRE |
Where, however, a police officer makes some preliminary enquiries, does not arrest or even question an accused or question any witnesses but merely makes a few discreet enquiries or looks at some documents without making any notes, it is difficult to visualise how any possible harassment or even embarrassment would res... |
If no harassment to the accused results from the action of a police officer how can it be said to defeat the purpose underlying Section 5-A PRE |
Looking at the matter this way, I hold that what Mathur did was something very much short of investigation and, therefore, the provisions of Section 5-A were not violated PRE |
Since no irregularity was committed by him there is no occasion to invoke the aid of the curative provisions of the Code PRE |
emphasis underlined PRE |
In the instant case, it is quite clear from the evidence on record that PW-1 received the information about the death of the deceased from PSI of Panaji Police Station without any detail as to how the incident had happened and who had caused the incident Ratio |
It was a very cryptic information received by him regarding the death of a person residing within the jurisdiction of his police station pursuant to an incident taking place on 10.04.1988 between 8.30 p.m. to 8.45 p.m. and, therefore, it appears that there was not enough information available to him either to get a G.D... |
In order to verify the information received, PW-21 went to the place of occurrence and found the entire house in total darkness Ratio |
He went around the house and saw blood marks on the walls of the verandah and also in the courtyard and came to learn about the incident by using torch light Ratio |
When he reached at the place of occurrence even the complainant party was not available there Ratio |
but at a later stage they came there Ratio |
Therefore, he brought them along with the residents of the house who were found to be there namely Accused No. 3 and the two juvenile offenders namely Sarita and Sharmila, who were all ladies Ratio |
After reaching the police station and at the request of PW-1 the FIR was recorded at 3.00 a.m. in the morning Ratio |
He received the information about the incident on telephone at about 10.45 p.m. and reached the place of occurrence at about 11.30 p.m. and he must have been there for quite some time and thereafter returned to the police station which must have taken another about 1.30 to 2 hours Ratio |
Therefore, recording of the FIR at about 3.00 a.m. in the morning was justified and properly explained and it cannot be said that there was any delay in recording the FIR Ratio |
Besides, the fact of his going to the place of occurrence would not amount to making an investigation Ratio |
There is no evidence to show that at that point of time, PW-21 seized any articles or interrogated any witnesses or took any other action in initiating or in furtherance of investigation Ratio |
The ratio of the decision in Bhagwant Kishore Joshi 1963 Indlaw SC 268 (supra) is applicable to the facts of the present case as the police officer merely visited the spot and place of occurrence and made some survey which cannot be regarded as investigation Ratio |
In Animireddy Venkata Ramana and Others v. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, (2008) 5 SCC 368, 2008 Indlaw SC 354 , this Court while considering a similar case observed as follows: " 10 PRE |
Certain basic facts are not denied or disputed PRE |
The deceased died in the bus at about 10.30 p.m. on 23-6-1998 while travelling to his village home from Tuni PRE |
PW 1 also sustained injuries in the said incident PRE |
Immediately after the incident, hearing cries of passengers, the driver of the bus stopped the bus PRE |
Not only the accused persons fled away, all others also did, including PWs 3 and 4 PRE |
They came back after a short while hearing the cries of PW 1 PRE |
They acceded to his request to take the bus to his house PRE |
From the records, it appears that the distance between the place where the accident took place and the village in question was not much PRE |
In any event, the destination of the bus was the said village and they were bound to take the bus thereat PRE |
PW 1 informed about the incident to PW 2, another son of the deceased PRE |
The dead body of the deceased was brought down from the bus and taken to the house PRE |
The conductor of the bus sent an information to the Depot Manager of the State Road Transport Corporation at Tuni PRE |
The investigating officer was also informed PRE |
A report to that effect might have been noted in the general diary but the same could not have been treated to be an FIR PRE |
When an information is received by an officer in charge of a police station, he in terms of the provisions of the Code was expected to reach the place of occurrence as early as possible PRE |
It was not necessary for him to take that step only on the basis of a first information report PRE |
An information received in regard to commission of a cognizable offence is not required to be preceded by a first information report PRE |
Duty of the State to protect the life of an injured as also an endeavour on the part of the responsible police officer to reach the place of occurrence in a situation of this nature is his implicit duty and responsibility PRE |
If some incident had taken place in a bus, the officers of Road Transport Corporation also could not ignore the same PRE |
They reached the place of occurrence in another bus at about 1 a.m PRE |
The deceased and the injured were only then shifted to Tuni Hospital PRE |
The ratio of the aforesaid decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case Ratio |
Even assuming that PW-21, the Investigating Officer could have entered the aforesaid information received from PSI of Panaji Police Station in the general diary, yet they said entry could not have been held or treated to be an FIR Ratio |
The information received by him was very cryptic and without any detail about the incident in question and, therefore, in any case, there was no possibility of recording an FIR at that stage Ratio |
The place of occurrence was in total darkness and even the persons belonging to the complainant side were not available, therefore, bringing them to the police station where there was sufficient light and recording the complaint at 3.00 a.m. cannot, in any manner, cast any doubt on the veracity of the prosecution case ... |
In that view of the matter it cannot be said that the FIR was in any manner hit by the provisions of S. 162 of CrPC Ratio |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.