Back
MADRAS HIGH COURT
P. N. RAMASWAMI
In re M.Rangarajulu Naidu
Versus
.
Criminal Appeals Nos. 495 to 497 510 and 513 of 1956
Decided On : 10 September, 1957
CRIMINAL LAW - EVIDENCE - FIRST INFORMATION REPORT - WHEN IT IS RECORDED - INVESTIGATION - WHEN IT STARTS - TEST TO DETERMINE - STATEMENTS MADE TO POLICE - WHEN ADMISSIBLE - ACCOMPLICE - WHO IS - TRAP WITNESS - WHEN EVIDENCE OF, BECOMES THAT OF ACCOMPLICE - EXPLANATION BY ACCUSED - VALUE TO BE ATTACHED TO IT.
Fact of the Case:
The case relates to a conspiracy to make or possess instruments or materials for the purpose of counterfeiting hundred-rupee currency notes of Reserve Bank of India of Asoka Pillar pattern. The accused were convicted by the lower court and they appealed.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the first information report was recorded when the police officer formed an opinion that there were grounds for investigating the crime. The investigation started from the moment when the police officer forms an opinion that there are grounds for investigating the crime. The statements made to the police before the commencement of the investigation are admissible under section 157 of the Evidence Act. A spy, detective, decoy, paid informer, trap witness etc., associating with the wrongdoers for discovery and disclosure of an offence is not an accomplice. The evidence of a trap witness which normally cannot be treated as the evidence of an accomplice becomes so when the trap witness is actually the instigator of the offence. The explanation of the accused may be so convincing as to falsify the prosecution case and in which case the accused would be entitled to an acquittal or the explanation may be held to be so reasonably true that it will pro tanto throw reasonable doubts on the prosecution version with the result that the State would not have discharged the onus of proof imposed on it by satisfying the Court beyond reasonable doubt of the prisoners guilt and in which case also the accused would be entitled to an acquittal.
Issues: 1. When is a first information report recorded? 2. When does investigation start? 3. When are statements made to the police admissible? 4. Who is an accomplice? 5. When does the evidence of a trap witness become that of an accomplice? 6. What value is to be attached to the explanation by the accused?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. A first information report is recorded when the police officer forms an opinion that there are grounds for investigating the crime. 2. Investigation starts from the moment when the police officer forms an opinion that there are grounds for investigating the crime. 3. Statements made to the police before the commencement of the investigation are admissible under section 157 of the Evidence Act. 4. A spy, detective, decoy, paid informer, trap witness etc., associating with the wrongdoers for discovery and disclosure of an offence is not an accomplice. 5. The evidence of a trap witness which normally cannot be treated as the evidence of an accomplice becomes so when the trap witness is actually the instigator of the offence. 6. The explanation of the accused may be so convincing as to falsify the prosecution case and in which case the accused would be entitled to an acquittal or the explanation may be held to be so reasonably true that it will pro tanto throw reasonable doubts on the prosecution version with the result that the State would not have discharged the onus of proof imposed on it by satisfying the Court beyond reasonable doubt of the prisoners guilt and in which case also the accused would be entitled to an acquittal.
Final Decision: The convictions of accused 1 to 5 and 7 by the lower Court are irreproachable and they are confirmed. In regard to the sentence, the punishments may legitimately be halved and I do so accordingly. In the result, C. A. No. 497 of 1956 is allowed and accused 6 is acquitted. C. A. Nos. 495, 496, 510 and 513 of 1956 are dismissed with the above modification in regard to the sentences.
JUDGMENT: These are connected appeals preferred by the accused who have been convicted by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge of Tirunelveli in Sessions Case No. 54 of 1956.
2. The case for the prosecution is that accused 1 to 7 conspired amongst themselves and with one Sivakolundu of Jaffna, Ceylon, between December 1954 and October 1955 at Tirunelveli and Madurai to make or possess instruments or materials for the purpose of counterfeiting hundred-rupee currency notes of Reserve Bank of India of Asoka Pillar pattern.
(After setting out the facts of the case the Judge has proceeded to examine the four points of law raised by the advocates for the accused.)
3-20. The learned advocate Mr. Mohan Kumaramangalam pressed before me four points viz., that when P. W. 46 received information about the operations of this gang on 26-7-1955, that constituted the first information report of a cognizable offence and that he should have registered a case then and there and that therefore the information collected thereafter can be adduced in Court only subject to the provisions of S. 162, Criminal Procedure Code; secondly, that P. W. 1 who on instructions by the Inspector posed as the Tanjore Mirasdar and feigned accomplice, is not a detective but an instigator of the offence and that therefore the Police far from prosecuting the accused should themselves be arraigned as instigators and abettors of the crime; thirdly, all evidence relating to Sivakolundu should be excluded as it would not come within the purview of S. 10 of the Indian Evidence Act; and fourthly, when the accused persons have put forward an explanation which might reasonably be true, the accused will be entitled to the benefit of doubt.
I shall now examine these four points of law in seriatim in order to demonstrate that they are totally devoid of substance in the context of this case, though as general theoretical propositions unrelated to the facts of this case they may be unexceptionable.
21. Section 154, Criminal Procedure Code lays down :
"Every information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence if given orally to an officer in charge of a police-station, shall be reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and be read over to the informant; and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be signed by the person giving it, and the substance thereof shall be entered in a book to be kept by such officer in such form as the State Government Section 157, Criminal Procedure Code, lays down: may prescribe in this behalf."
"(1) If, from information received or otherwise, an officer in charge of a police-station has reason to suspect the commission of an offence which he is empowered under S. 156 to investigate, he shall forthwith send a report of the same to a Magistrate, empowered to take cognizance of such offence upon a police report, and shall proceed ........to investigate ........"
22. This information which is usually called the First Information, is the basis upon which an investigation should be, and ordinarily is, commenced by the police under Chapter XIV of the Code. The information given in writing or reduced to writing under S. 154, Cr. P. C, is generally known as the First Information Report, though the word first is not used in the Code. Mani Mohan Ghose v. Emperor, AIR 1931 Cal 745 (A).
23. It is well-settled that the information contemplated must be in the nature of a complaint or accusation, with the object of setting the law in motion.
24. All criminal courts should bear in mind the importance of examining, when there appears to be any necessity to do so, the first information of an offence reduced to writing in accordance with this section. In view of the notorious tendency in this country to improve upon the original statement of facts to strengthen the case as it proceeds and sometimes to add to the persons originally named as the offenders.
So it is of very great importance to know what was s
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
