http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 17  

PETITIONER: KODALI PURANCHANDRA RAO & ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THE  PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH

DATE OF JUDGMENT02/09/1975

BENCH: SARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH BENCH: SARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH CHANDRACHUD, Y.V. BHAGWATI, P.N.

CITATION:  1975 AIR 1925            1976 SCR  (1) 602  1975 SCC  (2) 570

ACT:      Indian Penal Code (Act 45 of 1860)ss. 210, 218 and 468; Code of Criminal Procedure (Act 5 of 1898) s. 174-scope of.

HEADNOTE:      On  a   report  given  by  the  father,  regarding  the disappearance of  his two daughters, investigation was taken up by  the D.S.P.  because of certain special circumstances. After completing  the investigation, A-2, a sub-inspector of police, A-1,  his friend,  and  another  were  charged  with offenses under ss. 120B, 366, 376. 302/34, 201, 218, 468/34, and 324  I.P.C. for  conspiracy,  abduction,  rape,  murder, calling evidence of crime to disappear, fabricating reports, forgery and causing hurt.      The trial court acquitted all the accused. On appeal by the State, the High Court convicted A.1 and A.2 for offences under ss. 201, 218 and 468 I.P.C.      Dismissing the appeal to this Court, ^      HELD: (1)  In order-  to bring home an offence under s. 201, I.P.C.,  the prosecution  has to  prove;  (a)  that  an offence has been committed; (b) that the accused knew or had reason to  believe that  the offence has been committed; (c) that with  such knowledge  or  belief  he,  (1)  caused  any evidence of the commission of that offence to disappear, or, (ii) gave  any information‘respecting  that offence which he then knew  or believed  to be false; (d) that he did so with the  intention   of  screening   the  offender   from  legal punishment; and (e ) if the charge be of an aggravated form, as in the present case, that the offence in respect of which the accused  caused evidence  to disappear-  was  punishable with  death   or  with   imprisonment  for   life  or   with imprisonment extending to 10 years. [610A-E]      Whether the  circumstantial evidence  in  a  particular case is sufficient and safe enough to warrant a finding that an offence  has been  committed, is a question which belongs to the  realm of  facts and  not of  law. So is the question whether the  accused knew or had reason to believe that such an offence has been committed. [617H-618B] F      Palvinder Kaur  v. State  of Punjab  [1953] S.C.R.  94, explained.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 17  

    (2) In the present case the two girls died an unnatural death. The  corpse of  one was  found on a beach having been washed ashore  and the Corpse of the other was seen floating in the  sea. A  fisherman who  noticed the  second body  saw marks indicating  throttling. He  removed a  wrist watch and ornament, from  it and  allowed the  body to drift away. The wrist watch  and ornaments  were identified  as belonging to the younger  sister of the first victim. The 3 possibilities are, that  they committed suicide by drowning, or that their deaths were  accidental, or  that they were done to death by some  person   or  persons.  The  choice  of  any  of  these possibilities would  lead to the exclusion of the other two. [610G-H]      3(a) The  elder sister was a graduate and a nature girl of 22 who used to be the leader of the College Union. On the day of  the occurrence  the deceased  girls along with their parents had  participated in  certain festivities. They were cheerful and  there was  no evidence  to show that they were suffering  from   any  mental   depression   with   suicidal tendencies. [611E-H] 603      (b) The  body on  the  sea-shore  was  in  a  semi-nude condition. It  had on  only blouse, brassiere, petticoat and drawers but  no sari. From the fact that it is customary for women of  the locality  to tie  their  series,  tightly  the possibility of  the sari  having been swept off be waves was remote. This  shows that  she was  not wearing her sari when her body  was immersed  in water,  but no Indian woman would commit suicide  by jumping  into sea  in such  a  near  nude condition because.  ii would expose her body to post mortem. indignity. [611 H-162 C]      (c) When  the body was first seen there were, an injury on the  forehead from  which blood  was  oozing,  a  reddish abrasion on  the thigh  and blood  marks on the drawers. the stomach, however,  was not  in a  bloated  condition.  These circumstances show  that death was not due to drowning. [612 G; E-F]      (4) It  was nobody  s case  that any  boat met  with an accident off  or near  the sea-shore  resulting in  loss  of human life.  No suggestion of accidental death of any person or woman was put to and prosecution witness. Such a plea had not ever been put forward by the accused in their statements recorded under  s, 342,  Cr. P.C. Therefore, the possibility of accidental death must also be excluded. [613 B-D]      (5)  This   process  of   elimination  of  suicide  and accidental death inevitably leads to the conclusion that the death of  these two  girls, or  at any  rate  of  the  first victim, was due to culpable homicide. [613 D]      (6) From the very start, the investigation conducted by A. 2 was dishonest and fraudulent. He intentionally indulged in  suppessio veri and suggestio falsi. [613 E-F]      (a) The  morning after the night when the dead body was seen on the beach, a report was handed at the Police Station but the  Head Constable returned it saying that it should be drawn up  in the  printed form  and signed  by  the  village Munsuff. A  little later, A-2, the sub-inspector incharge of the police  station, came  there and the Head Constable told him about  the report.  At that  time A.1 and P. W. 49, also came to  the Police  Station, and  A.1 also  referred to the finding of  the dead-body  on the seashore. Thereafter, A.1‘ A-2 and  P.W. 49  and others  went to  the seashore at about noon. A-2  did not  hold any  inquest on  the dead body, but instead, directed  the body  to be  buried. When  the Karnam questioned A-2  why he did not send the body for post mortem examination, A-2  replied  that  the  body  was  that  of  a

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 17  

prostitute-though the  body was in an identifiable condition and he new the victim personally. He also said that it was a case of  suicide and  that P.W,  49 was  a relation  of  the victim. A.1,  who heard  this, also  said that P.W. 49 was a relation  of  the  victim.  Thereafter,  A-2  fabricated  an Inquest Report in which he stated falsely that there were no injuries on  the dead  body and that the stomach was bloated due to  drinking of  water, suggesting that it was a case of death by  drowning. He  also fabricated a false report as if given to  him by  one who knew the victim and the other girl to be prostitutes. That report was handed over by A-2 at the Police Station  only 5  days later  and he  asked  the  Head Constable to  note the  date as  if given 3 days before. The Head Constable  did so  after some  hesitation.  Inspire  of persistent requests  by the  D.S.P., A.2  sent the copies of the F.I.R.  and Inquest Report prepared by him only after an inordinate delay. A-2 also made false entries in the General Diary of the Police Station to corroborate the false Inquest Report and  the  fictitious  complaint.  He  even  tried  to dissuaded the  father  from  getting  the  body,  which  was buried, exhumed. [605 G-607 C; 614 G-616 E]      (b) It  was A-  2 s  duty to enter faithfully and truly the substance of the information in the station diary and to record further  that he  was proceeding for investigation on the basis thereof when he received information from the Head Constable about the reports regarding the finding of a dead- body on  the seashore.  Instead of  retrieving  the  written report that  had been  first received  at the police station and returned  by the  head-constable, he  fabricated another document purporting  to be  the first  information. All  the reliable witnesses  for the prosecution have deposed that no such person  as the  one who  gave the first information was present at  the scene  of occurrence.  When the  D.S.P.  was investigating into  the matter,  A-2 was not able to produce or give  any  indication  about  that  informant  though  he claimed to have known him. Efforts to trace the existence of the two  prostitutes mentioned  in  that  report  were  also futile  leading   to  the  inference  that  they  were  also fictitious persons. [613 F-614 F] 604      The credible  circumstantial  evidence  on  record  re- inforced by  the inference  available from the incriminating conduct of the appellants, particularly A-2, in deliberately preparing false  records to  suppress the  identity and  the cause of  death of  the deceased  girls fully  justifies the conclusion reached by the High Court. [611 B-C]      (c) Section  174, Cr.  P.C. peremptorily  requires that the officer  should hold  an inquest  on a  dead body at the spot. This  mandate is  conveyed by the word there occurring in s.  174(1). Section  174(3) gives  a  discretion  to  the Police  officer  not  to  sent  the  body  for  post  mortem examination only  in one case, namely, where there can be no doubt as  to the  cause of the death. This discretion has to be exercised prudently and honestly. [616 A-C]      (d) A-2 is a police officer of standing and experience, who was  expected; to  discharge the duties entrusted to him by law  with fidelity  and  accuracy.  He  was  required  to ascertain  the   cause  of   death   and   investigate   the circumstances and the efforts in which it was brought about. His duty  was to  make honest efforts to reach at the truth. He knew  the deceased  and saw the injuries on her dead body and must  have known  that in  the circumstances of the case autopsy of  the dead  body was  necessary to  ascertain  the cause or her death. He flouted all the salutary requirements of s.  174. Cr.  P.C.  and  his  conduct  in  distoring  and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 17  

suppressing material evidence and preparing false records as to the  identity of the dead body the cause of death and the falsification of  the data  bearing on that cause, could not be explained  on any  reasonable hypothesis save that of his guilt. [617 B-E; 618 D-F]      (7) As  regards A-1,  his concerted  conduct, including that in  supporting the fraudulent misrepresentation made by A-2 to  the Karnam.  regarding PW 49 being a relation of the deceased, shows that he was a guilty associate of A-2.

JUDGMENT:      CRIMINAL APPEALLATE  JURISDICTION: Criminal  Appeal No. 392 of 1974      Appeal by  Special Leave  from the  Judgment and  order dated the  25th April, 1974 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 701 of 1972.      P. Basi Reddy and G. Narasimhulu, for the appellant,      A, S.  Mulla, T.  V. S. N. Chari and P. P. Rao, for the respondent.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      SARKARIA J.-This  appeal is directed against a judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, converting-on appeal by the State  the acquittal  of the appellants into conviction. Appellant No.  1 (for   short  A-1) was an arrack contractor doing liquor  business inter  alia  within  the  territorial jurisdiction of Police Station Indukurpet, District Nellore, while Appellant  No. 2  (for short, A-2) was a Sub-Inspector of Police in-charge of this Police Station,      The appellants  and one  other person were tried by the Firs Additional  Sessions Judge  Nellore  on  charges  under ss.120-B, 366,  376, 302/34.,  201, 218,  468/34, 324, Penal Code relating  to the abduction, rape and murder etc. Of two sisters, named  Kalarani and  Chandrika Rani of Nellore. The Sessions Judge  acquitted  the  three  accused  of  all  the charges. Against  the acquittal  of the  appellants only the State preferred an appeal. The High Court partly allowed the appeal, set  aside the  acquittal on  charges 7,  8,  9  and convicted A-2 and A-I. under ss, 201, 201b34, Penal Code and sentenced each  of them to five years rigorous imprisonment. A-2 and A-1 were further Convicted under S. 218 and 218/109, Penal Code and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment, each. They were also convicted under 605 s. 468  and 468/34,  Penal Code  and sentenced  to two years rigorous imprisonment  each. The sentences on all the counts were directed  to run  concurrently. Their  acquittal on the remaining charges,  including those  of abduction,  rape and murder, was upheld.      The facts  of the prosecution case, as they emerge from the record" arc as follows:      Kalarani and  Chandrika Rani  deceased were  two of the six daughters  of PW1,  a  legal  practitioner  of  Nellore. Kalarani was  aged 21  and a graduate from the local Women’s College, Nellore.  She used  to  be  the  President  of  the College Union  and as  such was  well known.  Chandrika Rani was, aged  17 and a B.A. student in that very college. on 6- 6-1971 in  the morning  the deceased  girls along with their parents and  other sisters  attended a marriage in the house of a  family friend (P.W.2). In the afternoon they went away from the  marriage house  saying that they were going out to have coca-cola. At about 4 p.m. they boarded a bus bound for Mypaud which is a sea-shore resort at a distance of 11 miles from Nellore.  At about  5.40 p.m.  they were seen alighting

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 17  

from  the   bus  as   Mypaud  and  then  proceeding  towards Sagarvilla,  a   Travellers’  Bungalow   situated  near  the seashore. They  were last  seen at  about 6-30  p.m. On  the seashore by  P.Ws. 11,  12, 13  and 14. Shortly there after, P.W. 18,  a rickshaw puller was attracted to the seashore by the outcry  of a  woman. When be proceeded in hat direction, Chandrika Rani  came running  to him for help. P.W. 18 saw 4 persons including A-1 and A-2 carrying away Kalarani who was groaning. On  seeing P.W. 18, A-1 and A-2 turned on him. A-1 first slapped and then stabbed P.W. 18 on his right arm with a pen  knife, while  A-2 gave  blows on  his  back.  Out  of fright, P.W.  18 took  to his heels while Chandrika Rani was dragged away by the appellants.      On   6-6-1971   Chamundeshwari   Festival   was   being celebrated in  Gangapatnam and neighbouring areas at about 9 p.m. It  was a  bright moonlight  On learning  that the dead body of  a girl  had been  seen on  the beach  of Pallipalem which is  a hamlet  o Gangapatnam,  many persons went there. P.W. 23,  a fisherman of Pallipalem and P.W. 25. an employee of the Electricity Department were also among those persons. It was  the body  of a  girl, aged  about 21 or 22 years, of fair complexion  and stout  built. Blood  was oozing  from a reddish abrasion on the forehead. There was a gold ring with a red stone on the finger of the body. Next morning, P.W. 23 went to  P.W. 26,  the Sarpanch  of Gangapatnam and informed the later about the corpse on the seashore. P.W. 23 and P.W. 26 then  went to  the village Karnam (P.W. 27) as they found the village  Munsiff absent.  The Kamam  scribed a report to the dictation of P.W. 23. The Sarpanch signed it and sent it at about  7-30 a.m.  through a  bus driver  (P.W. 29) to the Police Station,  Indukurpet. The  report was  handed over in the Police  Station at about 8-30 a.m. to the Head-Constable (P.W. 34),  as A-2.  the Sub-Inspector  was away.  The  Head Constable   (P.W. 34).  read the  report and  returned it to P.W. 29  with the  objection that  the bearer should fetch a report drawn  up on  the printed  form  and  signed  by  the village Munsiff. Within a few minutes 606 of the return of the report, between 8-30 and 8-45 A.M., A-2 returned   to the Police Station. Just at this juncture P.W. 49, a Personal Assistant to P.W. 38, a cine actor of Madras, and A-1,  arrived there  in Car No. M.S.V. 1539, driven by a motor driver.  The car  had met  an accident on the 4th June within the  jurisdiction of this Police Station. The car was therefore at  least  theoretically-in  the  custody  of  the Police.      A-1 was  a mutual friend of A-2 and of the owner of the car. P.W.  49 therefore,  had  brought  A-1  to  the  Police Station to  help the former in getting the car released. A-1 introduced P.W.  49 to  A-2. A-1  then asked  A-2 if he knew that the  dead-body of a girl was found floating on the sea- shore. A-2  then asked  the head  Constable (PW  34) if  any report regarding  the  dead  body  was  received.  The  Head Constable replied  that a report from the Sarpanch about the dead body  seen on  the sea-shore  at  Pallipalem  had  been received but  had been  returned, as  it was  not  from  the village Munsiff.  A-2 said some person might have drowned as it usually  happened on the seashore. The Head-Constable and A-1 told  A-2 that  the body  found on the shore was said to have been  wearing drawers and might be of a person of high- class family.  A-2 said that he himself would go and enquire about it.  A-2 asked  P.W.4 to  take him  in his  car to the spot. Thereupon"  A-1, A-2,  P.W. 49, two constables and two others in  addition to  the driver,  proceeded in  the  car. After going  some distance,  the two  "others" got down. A-1

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 17  

and A-2  had a  talk with  them. The  car was  then taken to Ramudupalem. There  at about 11.30 A.M., A-1 and A-2 met the Sarpanch  (P.W.   26)  and  asked  him  to  follow  them  to Pallipalem. The car was then taken to Gangapatnam. There the Constables were  dropped. They left a message for the Karnam of  the   village  to  reach  Pallipalem.  Thereafter,  they proceeded to  the sea-shore  of Pallipalem. The car was left at the canal before the sea.      A-2, A-1, P.W. 49 and P.W. 26; then at about Noon, went to the  beach where  the dead  body lay. P.W. 23 and P.W. 25 were guarding the deadbody. It was the body of a fair, stout girl aged about 20 years, who was wearing brassiers, blouse, striped drawers  and a  white petticoat. P.W. 23 handed over the ring M.O.9 to A-2 after removing the same from the body. On being  directed by  A-2, P.W. 23 washed ’ the face of the corpse. There  was a  mark on  the forehead from which blood was oozing  out. There  was a  reddish abrasion on the thigh and blood  marks on  the drawer  of the dead body. On seeing the blood marks on the drawer, A-2 said that she might be in menses. A-2 further remarked that the body appeared to be of a girl  from a  high class family who had been out of doors. A-2 did  not hold any inquest there on the dead-body. He did not prepare any record there. He directed the village vettis (menials) to  bury the  dead body forthwith while he himself proceeded along  with his companions towards the village. In the distance they saw the Constables coming towards them. A- 2 signalled  them not  to come  near the  dead body  but  to proceed to  the Travellers’ Bungalow at Mypad, while A-2 and party went  to Mahalaxamma  Tample  in  village  Pallipalem. There A-2 607 secured the  signature of  P.W. 25, P.W. 26, P.W. 28 and A-1 on a  blank sheet of paper. A-2 and his companions then went to the  car. The  Karnam (P.W. 27) was there. A-2 reproached the Karnam  for coming  late and  added that he had finished all the  work for  which he  (Karnam) had  been sent for. He further told the Karnam that he had got the body buried. The karnam asked  as to  why A-2 did not send the body for post- mortem examination  A-2 replied  that  the  body  was  of  a prostitute who  had committed  suicide and  that he  did not suspect any  foul play  and so  he ordered burial The Karnam then enquired  if any relation of the deceased had come. A-1 replied "yes",  while A-2  pointed towards  P.W. 49 and said that he  was the person connected with the deceased. A-1, A- 2, P.W.  26, P.W.  27 and  P W. 49 then got into the car and proceeded. P.Ws.  26 and  27 were dropped near their houses. On the  way P.W.  49 asked  A-2 as to why he had represented him (P.W.  49) as  a relation  of the  deceased. A-2 assured P.W. 49 that there was nothing to worry.      According to  the prosecution,  this  dead  body  found ashore near Pallipalem-which is about 2 miles from Mypad-was of Kala  Rani deceased who was well-known to A-2. Inspite of it in the inquest report (Ex P-11) which was not prepared on the spot  but sometime later, A-2 wrote That the body was of a prostitute, named Koppolo Vijaya, daughter of Crhandravya, Baliya by  caste of  Ongole Town  who had on 6.6.71, come to Mypad along with her prostitute friend Nirmala by Bus A.P.N. 1400 at  5.45 P.M. and thereafter both these girls committed suicide by  entering sea  at about  6.30 P.M.  A-2 ended the report with an emphatic note:           "It  is  conclusive  that  the  deceased  (Koppulu      Vijaya) died due to drowning".      Despite the  presence of  injuries noticed  on the dead body A-2 recorded: "There are no injuries on the dead body". In order to support his version as; to the cause of death A-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 17  

2, according  to the  prosecution  falsely  noted  that  the "stomach is bloated due to drinking of water".      The prosecution  case further  is that  A-2  fabricated some time  after the  burial of the deadbody, a false report (Ex.P-25) purporting to have been made to him on 7.6.1971 by one Nuthalapati  Subba Rao  who despite  the best efforts of the investigators  has remained  untraced and is believed to be a  fictitious person.  As this  report has  an  important bearing on  the points  for determination, we will reproduce it in extenso:      "Statement   of    Nuthalapati   Subbarao,    son    of Venkateswarlu, aged about 30 years" Vysya of Patha-Guntur:           Being an  orphan for  about 1  years, I  have been      doing brokerage  in supplying extras in the cine field.      Day before  yesterday i.e.  On Friday  at Chirala  near      Lodges two girls Koppulu Vijaya d/o Sundrayya of Ongole      and Paranjapi Nirmala d/o Raghavayya of Chilakaluripeta      were met  by me.  I came  to know  that  they  live  by      prostitution. When  I told  them that I would join them      in Cinema they believed me 608      and came  with me.  On Sunday  i.e. On 6-6-1971, in the      morning we  came to  Nellore and stayed in Venkateswara      Lodge till 3.30 p.m. Their demand came for the girls. I      booked  two  males  for  these  two  girls.  Afterwards      dispute arose between me and the girls in respect of my      broekerage,  sharing   of  the   money  got   by   such      prostitution out  of the  money collected. They scolded      me in  an angry  tone and  went away crying and weeping      and saying  that I  took them  away from  their  places      promising to  join them  in Cinema,  cheated  them  and      committed rowdyism  without giving  them money  due  to      them. They  had only  wearing apparel with them. Vijaya      is short,  stout and  fair. Nirmala  is lean,  tall and      fair. They did not come back. I waited for a long time.      1 searched  for them  at the railway station, bus stand      and lodges. When I was inquiring at Atmakur Bus Stand I      came to  know that the girls went by Mypaud bus at 4.30      p.m. I  went to Mypaud and enquired. It was learnt that      the two  girls went  towards north  of Pattapulalem and      entered the  sea at  6 p.m. Having learnt that the body      of Vijaya  was washed  ashore I  went and  saw the dead      body. She  had  died  and  appears  to  have  committed      suicide. It  was also  learnt that the second girl also      committed suicide  but her  dead body  was  not  washed      ashore. Other facts about them are not known.                                             Sd/- N. Subbarao      Taken down  by me, read over to the person and admitted by him to be correct. On this 7th day of June 1971 at 11-30.                                            Sd/- B. Manoharan                                     S.I., E-3, dt. 7-6-1971.      H.C. 1212  Issue F.I.R.  u/s 174, Cr.P.C. and send copy to me for investigation.                                           Sd/- B. Manoharan,                         S.I. E-3, Camp Mypaud dt. 7-6-1971."      The dead-body of the other girl, Chandrika Rani was not washed ashore.  But in  the morning  of 7-6-1971, P.W. 36, a fisherman saw  the dead-body  of a girl agled 16 or 17 years floating in the sea at a distance of about 21 or 3 mils from Pallipalem, P.W. 36 saw a piercing wound on the left arm and black marks  indicating  throttling,  on  the  neck  of  the deadbody. P.W.  36 removed a wrist watch, a ring and an ear- ring from  the deadbody  and allowed it to drift away. These articles  were   later  handed   over  by  P.W.  36  to  the investigating officer and were identified to be of Chandrika

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 17  

Rani.      The  disappearance  of  the  deceased  girls  caused  a sensation.  The   local-newspapers  took   up  the   matter. Representations were  made to  the Home  Minister to get the matter investigated  by the  C.I.D.  The  Superintendent  of Police  directed   P.W.  59,   a  Probationer   D.S.P.,   to investigate the matter. On 18-6-1971, at the request of P.W. 59, the Tehsildar (P.W. 40) proceeded to exhume the deadbody of Kalarani.  The place  was pointed out by P.W. 33. A-2 was also present  there. On  digging the  bit only  some clothes were found in it. But close to 609 it, was found a skeleton. No marks of violence were detected on the  skeleton  by  the  Medical  officer,  P.W.  45,  who examined it  at the  spot. The skeleton was sent to P.W. 44, Professor of  Forensic Medicine. Who opined that it was of a female aged between 18 to 25 years. Further investigation of the case  was taken  over by  P.W. 60,  the C.I.D. Inspector who, after  completing it laid the charge-sheet against A-1, A-2 and one other person in the court of the Magistrate.      A-1 pleaded  that he  had been  falsely implicated.  He stated that  he knew  nothing about  the deceased  girls. He added that  on 7-6-1971,  he was in the Travellers’ Bungalow at Mypad  and went away from that place in the afternoon. He admitted that  he had  accompanied, P.W.  49, to  the Police Station on  7-6-1971 to assist the latter in getting the car release, and  from the  Police Station both of them (A-1 and P.W. 49)  on being asked by A-2, went with the latter in the car to the spot. He further admitted that he had slab-signed on a  sheet of  paper like others but he expressed ignorance if any inquest was held by A-2.      The plea of A-2 was that he had duly made an inquiry as to the  cause of  the death  and prepared the inquest report Ex. P-l  1. He  denied that  there were injuries on the dead body. Pleading  alibi for the 5th and 6th June 1971, he said that on  these dates  he was  away on casual leave to attend the marriage  of a  cousin at Chiraja which at a distance of about 100  miles  from  Indukurpet.  He  said  that  he  had proceeded to Chiraja in a car on the 5th morning., and after attending the  marriage returned to Nellore on the 6th by 5- 30 p.m.  and then  on the  morning of  the 7th June, resumed duty at  Indukurpet Police Station. On receiving information about the corpse of a female washed ashore, he went to Mypad and enquired about a person named Nathalapati Subba Rao. The latter gave  the  information,  Ex.  P.25,  which  he  (A-2) reduced into  writing and  then  held  the  inquest  in  the presence of  this Subba  Rao and  other Panchaitdars  at the spot. He did not know if Vijaya and Nirmala mentioned in Ex. P. 25  and Ex.  P. 11  were fictitious  persons. He  further admitted that  he was  unable to  produce this  Subba Rao in response to  the memo  dated 15-6-1971, issued by the D.S.P. (P.W. 59) during the stipulated time of 48 hours.      The Additional Sessions Judge held that the dead bodies found floating  near the  sea shore  were of  Kala Rani  and Chandrika Rani.  He further found that PW 18, who claimed to be an  eye-witness of  the occurrence,  was  not  worthy  of credit, and consequently, the charges of abduction, rape and murder had  not been  proved against  the accused. Regarding the charge  under S.  201, Penal  Code, the trial Judge held that the prosecution had failed to‘prove that an offence had been committed  in respect  of the  deceased. While  holding that the  identity of  the deceased was wrongly mentioned in Ex. P.  25 and  Ex. P. 11 as Vijaya and Nirmala, prostitutes he did  not rule  out the  possibility of  suicide.  In  the result? he acquitted the accused of all the charges.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 17  

    In appeal  by the State,  the learned Judge of the High Court, after  an exhaustive  survey of  the evidence, upheld the acquittal of the 610 accused in  respect of  the charge  of  abduction,  rap  and murder, but   reversed  the findings  of the  trial Judge in regard to the charges under ss. 201, 218 and 468, Penal Code against Al and A2.      In order  to bring  home an offence under s. 201, Penal Code the prosecution has to prove:           (1)  that an offence has been committed;           (2)  that  the  accused  knew  or  had  reason  to                believe the com mission of such offence           (3)  that with such knowledge or belief he                (a)  caused any evidence of the commission of                     that offence to disappear, or                (b)  gave  any  information  respecting  that                     offence which  he then  knew or believed                     to be false;           (4)  that   he  did  so  as  aforesaid,  with  the                intention  of  screening  the  offender  from                legal punishment           (5)  If the charge be of an aggravated form, as in                the present  case, it  must be proved further                that the  offence in  respect  of  which  the                accused did  as in  (3) and  (4), was  punish                able with  death, or  with  imprisonment  for                life or imprisonment extending to ten years.      The High  Court has found that all these ingredients of s. 201, were established in the present case.      Mr. Basi  Reddy,  learned  Counsel  for  the  appellant assails the  finding  of  the  High  Court  with  particular reference to  the first  and the last ingredients enumerated above. Counsel  contends that  the conviction  under s.  201 cannot be  sustained as  there is  no credible  evidence  on record to  show that  an offence  had been  committed. It is maintained that  the prosecution  has been  unable to  prove that  the   two  girls   met  a   homicidal  death.  In  all probability,  proceeds  the  argument,  the  deceased  girls committed suicide by jumping into the sea and were drowned.      For reasons  that follow  we are unable to accept these contetions.      The concurrent  finding of  the courts  below that  the dead body  washed ashore  near Pallipalem  was of  Kala Rani deceased and  that seer. floating in the sea, two miles away was of Chandrika Rani deceased, has not been disputed before us. It is also not controverted that these two girls died an unnatural death  on the  night between  the 6th  and 7th  of June, 1971 sometime after 6.30 P.M. at Mypad. Only the cause of their  death is  in issue. In regard to such cause, there could be  only three  possibilities, the  choice of  any  of which would  lead to  the exclusion of the other two. First, the girls  committed suicide by drowning. Second, that their deaths were  accidental. Third, that they were done to death by some person or persons. 611      After a  careful consideration of these alternatives in the light  of’ evidence on record, the learned Judges of the High Court  firmly  ruled  out  the  first  and  the  second possibilities, and concluded in favour of the third.      In our opinion, the credible circumstantial evidence on record reinforced  by  the  inferences  available  from  the incriminating conduct o’’ the appellants, particularly of A2 in deliberately  preparing false  records  to  suppress  the identity and  cause of  the deaths  of the  deceased  girls,

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 17  

fully  justifies  the  conclusion  reached  by  the  learned judges.  We,   therefore,  do  not  feel  the  necessity  of embarking upon  a reappraisal  of the  entire  evidence.  It would be  sufficient to  survey  and  consider  the  salient circumstances bearing on the alternatives posed above      First, we take up the possibility of suicide. Mr. Reddy submits with  reference to  the statement of PW1, the father of the  deceased girls.  that on  a previous  occasion  both these girls had without the permission of their parents, run away from home and were ultimately traced to the Rescue Home in Madras.  that Kala  Rani deceased  had about 4 or 5 years before the  occurrence taken  an overdone  of  tranquilizers presumably to  end her  life that they did not feel happy in their parental  house and once attempted to join the Ashram. This background,  according to  the learned  Counsel,  shows that the deceased had a predisposition to commit suicide. In the alternative,  suggests Mr.  Reddy, something  might have happened at Mypad on the 6th June, 1971, which impelled them to commit  suicide. Might  be the  girls got themselves into such a  situation that  they thought  suicide was  the  only course left to them to get out of the same.      We are not impressed by these arguments. It is wrong to assume that  these girls were very unhappy in their parental house, or their relations with their parents were estranged. Kala Rani,  particularly, was  a mature  graduate girl of 22 years. She  used to  be the  leader of the College Union. On the day  of occurrence,  the deceased girls along with their parents and sisters had participated in the festivities of a marriage in  the house  of a  family friend. They took their meals in  the marriage  house.  From  Nellore,  these  girls brought change  of clothes  for two  or  three  days’  stay. Thereafter, they  came happily  to Mypad. They first went to the Travellers’ Bungalow and were then last seen together at about 6-30 p.m. On the sea-shore. It is in evidence that the evening of  the 6th  June, was  an  occasion  of  Channdamma Festival. Procession of the deity accompanied by festivities was being  taken out  by the  devotees of  the  neighbouring villages. These  circumstances unmistakably  show  that  the diseased girls  had come  to enjoy  and stay at the sea-side resort of  Mypad for  2 or  3 days.  They were not suffering from any  mental depression  or schizophrenia  with suicidal tendencies .      Another circumstance  in the case of Kala Rani which is contraindicative of  suicide, is  that her  dead-body though seen within  an hour  or two of the occurrence on the beach, was in a semi-nude condition. 612 The sari  was not  on her  dead-body, which  she was wearing when last   seen at about 6-3 P.M. It can be argued that the sari  was   washed  off  her  body  by  the  sea-waves.  But considering that  her dead-body  was detected  only within a couple of  hours of  the occurrence  and the fact that it is customary for  women living  in or near the coastal towns to tie their series tightly, the possibility of the sari having been swept off by the sea-waves was remote. The inference is that in  all probability, she was not wearing this sari when her body  was immersed in water. Ordinarily, no Indian woman would commit suicide by jumping into the sea by getting into such a  near-nude condition  and thereby  expose her body to the risk of post-mortem indignity.      Another important  circumstance which militates against the suggestion  of the  death of  Kala Rani from drowning is that when the body was first seen at 9 P.M., its stomach was not in  a bloated  condition, for  was any froth seen coming out of  the mouth  of the corpse. the fact was vouched by PW

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 17  

23, a fisherman, who was rightly found worthy of credence by the High  Court. It may be added that contrary to what PW 23 has testified  A-2 has  in the  inquest report said that the stomach was  bloated with  water and froth was coming out of the mouth.  But as shall be presently discussed, these notes regarding the  condition of  the dead-body, were invented by A2 to  support  his  false  report  that  the  deceased  had committed suicide  and her  death was from drowning. Medical jurisprudence  tells  us  that  in  a  case  of  death  from drowning, the  stomach is  ordinarily found bloated with air and water  which is  instinctively swallowed by the drowning person during  the struggle  for life  (see Taylor’s Medical Jurisprudence, 12th Edn. Vol. I pp. 374-375).      The facts  that the  stomach was  not filled with water and bloated  and no froth was coming out of the mouth of the deceased, are  important symptoms  which to  a long  way  to exclude the  possibility of  death  being  as  a  result  of suicide by drowning.      Then there  were injuries  and blood-marks on the dead- body. PWs  23, 25,  26 and  27, all testified with one voice that they  had seen  one injury, from which blood was oozing out on the forehead, another on the thigh and blood marks on the drawer  (under-garment) of the deceased. In examination- in-chief, even  PW 49,  who in  cross-examination  tried  to dilute his  version in  a possible  attempt  to  favour  A2, stated that  he had  seen a  reddish strain (stain ?) on the forehead and  blood marks on the drawer of the deceased. Out of these  PWs, 23, 25 and 26 were present near the dead body when A2,  accompanied by  Al and P.W. 49, went there to hold the presence  of an  inquest.  PW  23  was  a  fisherman  of Pallipalem, PW 25 was also a resident of the same hamlet. He was an employee of the Electricity Department. PW 27 was the Karnam of  Gangapatnam. PWs  23  and  25  were  among  those villagers who had seen the deadbody washed ashore at about 9 P.M. On  6-6-71. The  High Court  found that  the version of these witnesses in regard to the injuries and blood-marks on the deadbody was entirely reliable. No reason has been shown why we should take a different view of their evidence. 613      It is further in the evidence of PWs. 23, 25, 26 and 49 that when  the blood-marks  on the drawer pointed out to A2, the latter  ignored it  saying that the girl had been out of doors and  was in  menstruation. Contrary to what he and the PWs. had  observed at  the spot,  A2 wrote  in  the  inquest report, P-11,  Col. VII: "There are no injuries on the dead- body".      Having excluded  the possibility of suicide, we may now consider,.  whether   the  deaths   of  these   girls   were accidental. It is no-body’s case that on the 6th June, 1971, any sea  craft, vessel  or boat  met with an accident off or near about  Mypad  resulting  in  loss  of  human  life.  No suggestion of  accidental death  of any  person, much less a women, off  or. On the sea-share near or far from Pallipalem was put to any of the prosecution witnesses. Nor such a plea has been  put forward  by the  accused in  their  statements recorded under  s. 342,  Cr.P.C Indeed,  tie learned Counsel for  the  appellants  has  not  pursued  any  such  line  of argument. We  have, therefore, no hesitation in negating the possibility of accidental death.      This process  of elimination inevitably leads us to the conclusion that in all probability the death of these girls, at any rate of Kala Rani, was due to culpable homicide.      Now  we   come  to   the  last  but  the  most  telling circumstance which  not only  confirms this  conclusion  and puts it  beyond doubt,  but also. unerringly establishes, by

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 17  

inference, the  other ingredients  of the offence, including that the accused knew or had reason to believe that culpable homicide of  Kala Rani had been committed. This circumstance is the  conduct of  A2,  in  intentionally  preparing  false records and its abetment by A1.      From its  very start  the investigation conducted by A2 was dishonest  and fraudulent.  He intentionally indulged in suppressio veri  and suggestio  falsi at  every step. He had been informed by the Head Constable (PW 34) at about 8 or 8- 45 A.M.  in the  Police  Station  that  a  report  from  the Sarpanch had  been received  about the  dead-body of  a girl bearing injuries,  found washed ashore near Pallipalem. This in formation  which was  passed on  to A-2  and on receiving which   he   proceeded   from   the   Police   Station   for investigation, was  the real  I.R. It was the duty of A-2 to enter faithfully and truly the substance of this information in the  Station Diary  and to  record further  that  he  was proceeding for  investigation on  the basis thereof. Instead of doing  so, he  intentionally suppressed  the  factum  and substance of  this first information and the real purpose of his  departure  from  the  Police  Station  in  the  records prepared by  him or  by his  subordinates in  his  immediate presence or under his supervision. Instead of retrieving the written report that had been first received at 8 A.M. in the Police Station  and was,  returned by  the Head-Constable to the  Sarpanch,   he  fabricated  the  document  Ex.  P.  25, purporting to  be the F.I.R. given to him at Mypad by one N. Subba Rao.  The false  story contained  in this document has been substantially  repeated in  the inquest  report, Ex. P. 25. 614      P.Ws. 23,  25, 27  and 49  discount the presence of any such person,  named N. Subba Rao either at the inspection of the dead-body  in the  sea-shore by  A-2 or  at the ’Temple, where according to A-2, he prepared the inquest report. None of these  PWs has sworn that a statement of any N. Subba Rao was recorded  in their presence by A-2. No specific question was put  by the  defense to  PW 49  in cross-examination  to establish that  the report  Ex. P-25  was scribed  by A2  at Mypad at  about 11.30,  to the  dictation of N. Subba Rao or any  other   person  although   the  witness  was  generally questioned as  to the  number of persons carried in the car. P. W.  27, the  Karnam, has definitely excluded the presence of any  informant named  Subba Rao.  P.W. 27  testified that after the  inquest, Al"  A2, P.W.  26  and  "a  new  person" implying  PW  49,  met  him  and  thereafter  all  the  five (including PW  27) got  into the  car and  proceeded to  the village. P.W.  27 did  not vouch the presence of a sixth man in the  car. Only  PW 26 has stated that R2 had recorded the statements of witnesses including that of a per son named N. Subba Rao.  PW 26 had reason to tell a lie on this point. PW 26 admitted  that at  the time  of the  inquest, he  was  an accused in  a criminal case of Indukurpet Police Station. A2 was at  the material  time In-charge  of that Police Station and was  presumably concerned with the investigation of that case against PW 26. PW 26 therefore appears to have deviated from truth  in regard to the presence of N. Subba Rao, under the influence  of the  accused. In any case, the evidence of PW 26  on this  point stands  contradicted by  the  reliable testimony of PWs 23, 25, 27 and 49.      In the inquest report, as also in Ex. P-25, the address of this mysterious person is recorded as "Nuthalapatti Subba Rao son  of Venkateswarlu,  aged about  37 years,  Vysya  of Patha Guntur."  Despite efforts, the investigating officers, PWs 59 and 60, could not trace on the basis of this address,

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 17  

any person  bearing the  said particulars  at Pata Guntur or anywhere else  in the  District. In  response  to  the  memo issued by  the D.S.P. (PW 59) A-2 could neither produce this N. Subba  Rao, nor  give any indication about his existence, though A2  claimed to have known him. For these reasons, the High Court was right in holding that this Nathalapatti Subba Rao was  a fictitious person of A2’s imagination. Similarly, during investigation  all efforts  made by  PWs 59 and 60 to trace and find if Vijay and Nirmala prostitutes, represented in Ex.  P-25 and  Ex. P-11  as  the  deceased  persons  ever existed in  flesh  and  blood,  remained  futile.  In  these premises, the High Court was right in concluding that Vijaya and Nirmala  prostitutes were  also the coinage of the brain of A2.      It is  necessary to  say something  more about Ex. P-25 because the  entire story  was spun around it by A-2. It did not see the light of the day till the 11th June. A-2 did not send it  to the  Police Station for registration before that date. It is in the evidence of P. W. 55, who at the material time was  a Head  Constable posted  in this  Police Station, that after  his departure  in the  morning of  the 7th,  A-2 returned to  the Police  Station on  the 10th evening and it was then  that he  handed over  this document to the witness with the  direction that the latter should enter that report in the  relevant register,  dating it as the 7th June, 1971. The Head Constable after slight hesitation 615 agreed and inserted this report in the blank space meant for the entries  of the 7th June, and thereafter, as required by A2, handed  over to  the latter,  a copy of that report. A-2 also made  an entry  (Ex. P  34) in the General Diary of the Police Station,  dated 10.6.1971  on 11.6.1971  at 2 A.M. It reads:           "Returned to  P.S. after  leaving it  on 7.6.71 at      9.30 a.m. visited Mypadu en route to Gangapatnam at 11-      00 hours  at 11-30 a.m., recorded statement of N. Subba      Rao,  sent   to  Police   Station  for   issuing  First      Information Report  u. sec.  174 Cr.P.C.  then  visited      Pallipalem at  12-30 p.m.  investigated,  held  inquest      over dead  body of  K.  Vijaya.  At  20-30  p.m.,  left      village reached  Mypadu at  21.30 hours, made enquiries      in Cr.  48/71 and halted. On 9.6.71 visited Gangapatnam      detailed  duties   for  bandobust  and  visited  Ravur,      investigated into  Cr. 47/71,  visited Nellore at 12-30      hours" did  bandobust for  festival and  halted for the      night. On  9.6.71 visited  Mypadu for  petition enquiry      and investigated  into Cr.  48/71, 41,42  and 44/71 and      hailed. On  10-6-71 visited Gangapatnam, supervised and      did  bandobust   for  car  festival  at  00.-30  hours,      received First  Information Reports  in Cr. 49 to 51/71      at 00-45  hours, left  the village with men and reached      Police Station."      A mere  glance at this report betrays its falsity. This shows how  in his  anxiety to suppress the truth he tried to reinforce and  cover up  one falsehood with another. In this connection, it  may be  noted that  the D.S.P.  persistently pressed A-2 to send the copies of the F.I.R. and the Inquest Report. A-2  was unable  to supply  any copy  of the  F.I.R. before the 12th of June, when the D.S.P. himself came to the Police Station  and  collected  it.  The  D.S.P.  (P.W.  59) testified that on the 11th June, 1971, he had questioned A-2 about the  First Information  Report and the inquest report. As a result he received a copy of the F.I.R. On the 12th but did not receive any copy of the inquest report. Consequently on 14.6.71, he telephoned to A2 to send the case diaries and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 17  

inquest report without further delay. Despite these efforts, the D.S.P.  did not  receive whose  records on  that day. on 15.6.71, he  issued a  memo. to  A-2 directing the latter to produce immediately  the complaint  of  N.  Subba  Rao,  the inquest report  and the  case diaries. It was only then that A2 produced the persistently requisitioned records.      These inordinate delays in sending the records prepared by A2,  confirm the  testimony of  PWs 23, 25 and 49 that no inquest on  the dead-body  was held at the spot, nor was the inquest report  or any other record prepared there and then, and that  their signatures  were obtained  by A2  on a blank sheet of  paper. Of course PW 26 stated that A2 had recorded statements of  witnesses and had prepared the inquest report at the  Temple. As  already noticed,  it is  not prudent  to accept this  version of PW 26. He had a motive to favour A2. Moreover, his  version stands inferentially falsified by the circumstances including the unusual delay in registering the report Ex.  P 25  in the  Police Station  and in sending the copies of the records to the D.S.P. 616      Section 174,  Cr.P.C  peremptorily  requires  that  the officer holding   an  inquest on  a deadbody should do so at the spot.  This mandate  is conveyed  by  the  word  "there" occurring in  sec. 174(1).  Sub-section (3)  of the  Section further requires  the officer holding the inquest to forward the body  with a  view to its being examined, by the medical man appointed by the State Government in this behalf, if the state of  the weather and the distance admit of its being so forwarded without  risk of  such purification on the road as would render such examination useless. The sub-section gives a discretion  to the Police officer not to send the body for post-mortem examination  by the medical officer only in. One case, namely, where there can be no doubt as to the cause of the death.  This  discretion  however  is  to  be  exercised prudently  and   honestly.  Could   it  be   said   in   the circumstances of the case, that there was no doubt as to the death of Kala Rani being from drowning ?      In this  connection it  is important  to note that Kala Rani was not a total stranger to A-2. It is in evidence that A-2 used  to go  to Nellore  for Bandobust  and there he had sufficient opportunity  to come  across Kala  Rani who was a prominent student-leader. The testimony of P.W. 47 is to the effect that  when on 17.7.1971, A2 came to him and requested the witness  to dissuade  the father  of the  deceased  from getting the  dead-body exhumed,  he (A2)  admitted that Kala Rani deceased was well-known to him      The body  was not  in an  unidentifiable condition. A-2 therefore could  he under no mistake that it was the body of Kalarani deceased  particularly when  he inspected  it after its face  had been washed by PW. 23 under the orders of A-2. Despite such  knowledge, he  laid a false trail and prepared false  record   mentioning  that   the  deadbody  was  of  a prostitute named Vijaya.      Medical jurists  have warned  that in  the  case  of  a deadbody found  floating in  water, the  medical man  from a mere observance  of the   external  condition  of  the  body should not  jump to  the conclusion  that the death was from drowning. Only  internal examination  of the body can reveal symptoms which may indicate with certainty as to whether the death was  from drowning  or from.  unlawful violence before the body  was immersed  in water.  That is  what Taylor  the renowned medical jurist, has said on the point:           "When a deadbody is thrown into the water. and has      remained there sometimes water. fine particles of sand,      mud. weeds  etc. may pass through the windpipe into the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 17  

    large air-tubes. In these circumstances, however, water      rarely penetrates  into the smaller bronchi and alveoli      as it  may by  aspiration, and  even the  amount  which      passes through  the glottis is small. If immersed after      death the  water is  found only in the larger air-tubes      and  is  unaccompanied  by  mucous  froth.  Water  with      suspended matters  can penetrate  even to  the  distant      air-tubes in  the very  smallest quantity even when not      actively inhaled by respiratory efforts during life The      quality, or  nature of  the suspended  matter may be of      critical importance.***When  decomposition is  advanced      the lungs 617      may be  so putrefied  as to  preclude any opinion as to      drowning but  the demonstration  of diatoms  in distant      parts of  the body  inaccessible except  to circulatory      blood, provides strong evidence of immersion in life if      not of death from drowning." (emphasis supplied) A2 was  a Police officer of standing and experience. He knew the deceased.  He saw injuries on her deadbody. He must have known-if he  were honest-that  in the  circumstances of  the case autopsy of the deadbody by a medical officer was a must to ascertain  the cause of her death. Instead of sending the deadbody for  post mortem examination, he in indecent haste, purposely got  it buried without holding, any inquest at the spot. He  did not  send for  the relations  of the deceased. Even a  layman  like  the  Karnam  (PW  27)  felt  something strangely amiss  in this  conduct of  A2. In response to the queries made  by the  Karnam,  A2  made  false  excuses.  He intentionally misrepresented (in concert with A1) that PW 49 was a  relation of the deceased. He flouted all the salutary requirements of s. 174, Cr. P.C. A-2’s conduct in distorting and suppressing  material evidence  and in  preparing  false records (Ex.  P-11 and  P-25) as  to  the  identity  of  the deadbody, the  cause of  the death  and the falsification of the data  bearing on  that cause,  could not be explained on any reasonable  hypothesis  save  that  of  his  guilt.  The circumstances established  in  this  case  unmistakably  and irresistably point  to the  conclusion that within all human probability, accused  No. 2  knew or  had reasons to believe that Kala  Rani had  been done  to death  by some  person or persons. All  the elements  of the  charge under  s. 201 had thus been proved to the hilt against him.      Before considering  the case  of Al, we may notice here the decision  of this  Court in  Palvinder Kaur, v. State of Punjab(1). This  decision was  cited by  the learned Counsel for the  appellants in  support of  his  argument  that  the circumstances: that  the deceased  died, that  the appellant prepared false  record regarding  the cause  of her death or caused post-haste  disposal of  the dead  body  without  any autopsy or  its  identification  by  the  relations  of  the deceased, do  not establish the cause of Kalarani’s death or the manner  and the  circumstances in  which it  came about. Counsel laid  particular stress  on the  observation of this Court in that case that in cases depending on circumstantial evidence courts  should  safeguard  themselves  against  the danger of  basing their  conclusions on suspicions howsoever strong.      The decision  in Palvinder  Kaur’s case  (supra)  is  a precedent on  its own  facts. The observations of this Court to the effect, that "Jaspal died, that his body was found in a trunk  and  was  discovered  from  a  well  and  that  the appellant took  part in  the disposal  of the  body  do  not establish  the   cause  of  his  death  or  the  manner  and circumstances in which it came about" cannot be construed as

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 17  

an enunciation  of a  rule of  law of  general  application. Whether the  circumstantial evidence in a particular case is sufficient and  safe enough  to warrant  a finding  that  an offence has been committed. is      (1) [1953] S.C.R. 94. 9-L925SupCI/75 618 a question  which belongs  to the  realm of facts and not of law. So  is    the  question whether the accused knew or had reasons to  believe that such an offence has been committed. It  is  true  that  this  question  further  depends  on  an assessment of  the accused’s  mind. Nevertheless,  it  is  a question of  fact "The  state of  a man’s  mind", quoth Lord Bowen, "is as much a fact as the state of his digesion".      In Palvinder  Kaur’s case  (supra) there  was,  in  the first place,  no material,  direct or indirect, justifying a finding  that   the  death  of  Jaspal  was  caused  by  the administration of  potassium  cyanide  and  if  the  defence version was  believed his  death would  be the  result of an accident. In  that version  was disbelieved  then there  was absolutely no proof of the cause of his death. In the method and the  manner in  which the  deadbody of  Jaspal was dealt with and disposed of by the accused did raise some suspicion but from  these facts,  the Court  found it unsafe to draw a positive conclusion  that he  necessarily died  an unnatural death. Nor  could  the  possibility  of  the  commission  of suicide by Jaspal be totally ruled out.      The position  of  A2  in  the  present  case  was  very different. He  was a Police officer and as such was expected to discharge  the  duties  entrusted  to  him  by  law  with fidelity and  accuracy. He  was required  to  ascertain  the cause of  the death and to investigate the circumstances and the manner in which it was brought about. His duty it was to make honest efforts to reach at the truth. But he flagrantly abused the  trust reposed  in him  by law.  He intentionally fabricated false  clues, laid  false trails, drew many a red herring across  the net,  smothered the  truth,  burked  the inquest, falsified  official records and short circuited the procedural safeguards.  In short,  he did everything against public justice  which is penalised by s 201, Penal Code. The other circumstantial  evidence apart,  the series  of  these designed acts  of omission and commission on the part of A2, were eloquent  enough to indicate in no uncertain terms that A2 knew  or had reasons to believe that Kalarani’s death was homicidal.      It is  not disputed that A1 was a friend of A-2. It was A-l who  had supported  A-2’s idea  that the  latter  should himself go  to the  spot to investigate as the deceased girl appeared to  be from  a high  class family.  Standing alone, this circumstance  is not  of a  conclusive tendency. But in the  context   of  his   subsequent   conduct   it   assumes significance. He wilfully conducted himself in such a manner that there  could be no doubt that he was a guilty associate of A-2.  When in  the context  of the burial of the deadbody ordered by A-2 without sending the body for post mortem, the Karnam (PW  27) asked  whether any  relation of the deceased had come,  A-2 pointed  towards PW  4  saying  that  he  was related to  the deceased.  Simultaneously, A-1 said . "Yes". This concerted  conduct of  A-1 in fraudulently representing PW 49 to be a relation or the deceased, when he knew that PW 49 was  not such  a relation,  clearly marks  him out  as an intentional abettor  and a  guilty partner in the commission of the offence under sec. 201, Penal Code. 619      There can  be no  doubt that  on the basis of the facts

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 17  

found, the  charges under  ss. 218, 468, Penal Code had been fully established  against the appellant; A-2 being a public servant charged  with the  preparation  of  official  record relating to  the investigation  of the cause of the death of Kalarani, framed  that record  in a  manner which he knew to be, incorrect  with intent  to save  or knowing to be likely that he  will thereby  save the  true offender  or offenders from legal punishment. obviously, he prepared this false and forged record with the fraudulent and dishonest intention of misleading his,  superior officers  and in during them to do or omit  to do  anything which  they would not do or omit if they were  not so  deceived or  induced. A-l,  as  discussed already, facilitated  and intentionally  aided A-2,  in  the preparation of the false and forged record.      For the foregoing reasons we uphold the convictions and sentences of  the appellants, on all the counts, as recorded by the High Court, and dismiss the appeal. V.P.S.                                     Appeal dismissed. 620