State of A.P. Vs.
V.V. Panduranga Rao  INSC 880 (4 May 2009)
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 815 OF 2003 State
of A.P. .....Appellant Versus V.V. Panduranga Rao .....Respondent
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT,
in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh
High Court directing acquittal of the respondent who faced trial for having
allegedly committed the murder of his wife Veeranki Bhulaxmi (hereinafter
referred to as the `deceased'). It was the prosecution case that after
committing the murder of his wife, the accused had tried to commit suicide by
cutting his throat with knife. He was charged for commission of offences
punishable under Sections 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short
the `IPC'). He was tried for both the offences, but he was sentenced only in
respect of offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.
version, in a nutshell, is as follows:
The accused, the deceased
and the prosecution witnesses were the residents of Venkuru village of
Vijayawada, Krishna district. The deceased was the wife of the accused. PW-1
was the mother, PWs 2 and 3 were daughters and PW-4 was brother of the
deceased. The deceased and PW-2 were attending cooli work and were maintaining
the family. They shifted their residence to Venkuru village for their
livelihood and were staying in the house of PW-1. On the intervening night of
2/3-3-2000 at about 3.45 a.m. the deceased was sleeping on her cot in their
house in Venkuru. The accused hacked her with a knife on her neck and caused
her instantaneous death and later he attempted to commit suicide by cutting his
throat partially with a knife. PW-1 woke up in the early hours and noticed that
the deceased was lying with bleeding injury on her neck and the knife with
blood was in the hands of the accused. Then on seeing PW-1 the accused fled
away. A complaint was lodged and it was registered in Cr.No.48 of 2000 of
Penamluru police station. Inquest was held over the dead body of the deceased
and the same was sent for post mortem examination. PW-8, the Medical Officer
conducted autopsy and issued post mortem certificate. The statements of the
witnesses were recorded and investigation was undertaken.
On completion of
investigation charge sheet was filed. As the accused person pleaded innocence
trial was held. As noted above, the trial Court placed reliance on the evidence
of mother (PW-1) of the deceased and recorded conviction. The High Court found
that the evidence of PW-1 on whose evidence the conviction was recorded does
not inspire confidence. It was also noted that the report was given to the
police officer on telephone as admitted by the brother of the deceased at about
4.00 a.m. The same does not appear to have been recorded in writing and on the
other hand the police officer claimed to have come to the place of occurrence
and recorded the statement of the mother and converted it into the FIR. The
High Court noted that it was not explained by the investigating officer as to
why the telephonic message was not reduced into writing.
With reference to the
evidence of PW-1 the High Court noted that she stated that her son had informed
the police. It is not known as to what the son of PW-1 told the police i.e.
whether he told about the details of the crime or that some crime had taken
place. If it is former then the message was required to be reduced in writing.
The police officer who received the telephonic message is PW-10. According to
him he received a telephonic message that some murder had taken place. He
categorically admitted that he did not reduce the information into writing.
Added to that the High Court noted that the FIR reached the police station
after about 7 hours. In the FIR it was noted the injuries which were of very
serious nature on the person of the accused were not explained. It did not
accept the stand taken that the accused tried to commit suicide.
counsel for the appellant-State submitted that the reasons recorded by the High
Court to direct acquittal are not sustainable in law. It is stated that the
message purported to have been given over telephone was a cryptic one and,
therefore, cannot be treated as a FIR.
counsel for the respondent supported the judgment of the High Court.
facts have been rightly noted by the High Court. Where the information is only
one which required the police to move to the place of occurrence and as a
matter of fact the detailed statement was recorded after going to the place of
occurrence, the said statement is to be treated as FIR. But where some cryptic
or anonymous oral message which did not in terms clearly specify a cognizable
offence cannot be treated as FIR. The mere fact that the information was the
first in point of time does not by itself clothe it with the character of FIR.
The matter has to be considered in the background of Sections 154 and 162 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the `Code'). A cryptic
telephonic message of a cognizable offence received by the police agency would
not constitute a FIR.
object and purpose of giving a telephonic message is not to lodge the FIR but
to request the officer incharge of the police station to reach the place of
occurrence. On the other hand if the information given on telephone is not
cryptic and on the basis of that information the officer in charge is prima
facie satisfied about the commission of a cognizable offence and proceeds from
the police station after recording such information to investigate such offence
then any statement made by any person in respect of the said offence including
details about the participants shall be deemed to be a statement made by a
person to the police officer in the course of investigation covered by Section
162 of Code. That statement cannot be treated as FIR. To put it differently any
telephonic information about the commission of cognizable offence irrespective
of the nature of details of such information cannot be treated as FIR. If in
the instant case PW-6 proceeded on the basis of what has been told by PW-1 to
him about the murder of the deceased it was but natural that PW-1 would have
told him who the author of the crime was. That is not the case of the
There has been lots
of improvements in the evidence of PW-1 i.e. what she had made during
investigation when compared with that recorded in Court.
investigation PW-1 had not stated that he had seen the accused standing near
the dead body of the deceased or that on hearing her cries her son Venkanna who
has not been examined came there and informed the incident to the police by
phone. She had also not stated that the accused had told her that he had cut
the throat of the deceased with a knife which is available in the house.
Interestingly, there was no effort made to match the blood group of the
deceased with the blood found on the M.O.1. If the aforesaid aspects are
considered, the inevitable conclusion is that the appeal is without merit,
deserves dismissal which we direct.
(Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT)