THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH versus N. VENUGOPAL AND OTHERS

Citation: [1964] 3 S.C.R. 742 · Decided: 09-05-1963 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Cited by 5 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

1911 -""' '· 
742 
SUPRE:ME COURT REPORTS [1964] VOL. 
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH 
v. 
N. VENUGOPAL AND OTHERS 
(P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, K. N. WANCHOO 
and K. C. DAs GUPTA JJ.) 
Oriminal Law-Limitation-Prosecution of Police O.tfi-
ur1-Poliu Officer torturing suspecta during investigation-
Whellleracl• done under the provi.ians of law-Madras Police 
Standing Ordera, Or. No. 145-lj ha,, Ille force of law-Whether 
mandatory-Madras District Police Act, 1859 (Mad. 24 of 
1869), •• 68. 
During the course of the investigation of a case of house· 
breaking and theft information was received that R had received 
tbe stolen article. The appellants, who were a Sub-Inspector of 
Police, a Head Constable and a Constable, respectively, took 
R into custody onJanuary 6, 1957. Less than three days later 
R was found lying dead with a number of injuries on the body. 
The appellants 
were prosecuted for having caused injuries to 
R, acting in concert for the purpose of extorting from him 
Information which might lead to the detection of an offence 
and restoration of stolen property, and also for having his body 
thrown at the place where it was ultimately found with the 
intention of screening 
themselves from punishment. The 
appellants pleaded inter alia (I) that the prosecution was barred 
by limitation by reason of the provisions of s. 53 of the 
Madras District Police Act, 1859, and (2) that the trial of the 
appellants was vitiated by the fact that the completion of the 
investigation of their case was done by an Inspector of Police 
and this contravened the Madras Police Standing Orders under 
which 
investigation 
in cases against the police for torture 
and causing death had to be conducted by a person of the rank 
, of Assistant or Deputy Superintendent of Police or by the 
Sub-Divisional Magistrate. 
Held that the prosecution of the appellants was not barred 
by limitation under s. 53 of the 
Madras 
District Police 
Act, 1859 .. 
No provision of law authorised police officers to beat 'a 
pe..- wltb a view to induce him to make statement; and 
3 S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
743 
though in the present case the act of beating was alleged to 
bave been done when the appellants were engaged in investi· 
gation, there could be no reasonable connection between 
those acts and the process of investigation. The acts complained 
of could not be said to have been done or intended to be done 
under any provision of the Madras District Police Act or the 
Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law conferring powers 
on the police, and, consequently, s. 53 of the Madras District 
Police Act had no application to the present case, 
Virupappa Veerappa Kadampur v. The Slate of MgBore, 
[1963] Supp. 2 S.C.R. 6, followed. 
' 
HeUJ, further, that the provisions of the Madras Police 
Standing Order No. 145 were nothing more than administra• 
tive instructions by the Government of Madras and did not have 
the force of law; that, in any case, the requirement of the 
Standing Order was merely directory and not mandatory, and 
non-compliance did not make the investigation of the case 
illegal; and that even assuming that the Standing Order had 
the force of Jaw, the trial of the appellants would not be rende-
red invalid unless it was shown that miscarriage of justice had 
been caused on account of the illegal investigation. 
H. N. Riahbud anti ln<ier Singh v. TM State of Dellii, 
[1955) I S.C.R. 1150, followed. 
CRIMINAL APPELLATEJUBISDWTION: Criminal 
Appeal No. 142of1961. 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and 
order dated August 31. 1960, of the Andhra Pradesh 
High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 551 of 1958. 
A. S. R. Chari, K. R. Chaudhuri and P. D. 
Menon, for the appellant. 
N. N. Keawani, for the respondents. 
1963. May 9. 
The Judgment of the court was 
delivered by 
DAS GuPTAj.-The three respondents, Venu-
gopal, Rangaswamy and Subbaiah were tried along 
with one Mittala Kamal Sab by the Session Judge, 
Sl4t10J '"""' 
Pr-
y, 
N. Y1nu1.;al 
Da#A;t•I. 
i96; 
Slal• . .ef Andhra · 
fraJes.h 
v. 
N. Y1nugopal 
D1JS Gupt• J. 
744 
SUPRENIE COURT·REPORTS (1964] VOL. 
Anantapur Division, on a number of charges. Kamal 
Sab was acquitted of all the charges against him, but 
these three respondents were convicted of several 
offences. All three of them were convicted under 
ss. 348, 331, and 201 read with s. 109 of the Indian 
Penal Code. Venugopal was further convicted under 
s. 343 of the Indian Penal Code. · For the offence 
under s. 34

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.