AIR 1993 SUPREME COURT 2644 ::1993 AIR SCW 3428 ::(1994) 2 CriCJ 670 ::(1994) 2 CriCJ 238 ::(1994) 55 DLT 428 ::(1994) 3 CurCriR 2116 ::(1994) 1 CurCriR 548 ::1994 SCC(Cri) 734 ::(1994) 3 RecCriR 46 ::1994 (2) RecCriR 103 ::(1994) 3 AllCriLR 135 ::(1994) 3 ChandCriC 6 ::(1994) 29 DRJ 384 ::(1994) 7 OCR 150 ::1994 (1) SCC(Supp) 590 ::(1994) 2 Crimes 884 ::1993 JT (Supp) 531

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Andhra Pradesh)

Hon'ble Judge(s): A. S. Anand, N. P. Singh , JJ

(A) Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.154— Complaint about cognizable offence - Refusal by police to record on ground that concerned police station has no territorial jurisdiction over place of crime - Amounts to dereliction of duty - Proper course is to record information and forward to police station having jurisdiction. (Para 4) (B) Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.154, S.162— FIR or statement recorded during investigation - Investigation Officer deliberately not recording FIR after receipt of information of cognizable offence - Registering the complaint as FIR after reaching the spot and after due deliberations, consultations and discussion - Complaint could not be treated as FIR - It would be a statement made during investigation and hit by S. 162. (Para 5) (C) Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.3— Interested witnesses - Not by itself enough to discard their testimony - Their evidence is to be scrutinised carefully - Investigation found to be tainted and unsafe to rely upon - Testimony of interested witnesses could not be relied upon in absence of strong corroborative evidence of clinching nature. (Para 5) .....