Full Judgment Text
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