Webinar

Jessica Lal Murder Case


Court :
Supreme Court of India

Brief :
The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the information given by any individual on telephone to the police is not for the purpose of lodging a First Information Report, but rather to request the police to reach the place of occurrence, whereas the information about the commission of an offence given in person by a witness or anybody else to the police is for the purpose of lodging a First Information Report. Phone calls made immediately after an incident to the police constitutes an F.I.R. only when they are not vague and cryptic.

Citation :
Sidhartha Vashisht vs. State

Facts:

Jessica Lal, a bartender was shot by Sidhartha Vashisht at a restaurant in Delhi after she refused to serve the Appellant a drink after the closing hours. In the trial, Manu Sharma and a number of others were acquitted. The prosecution appealed and the Delhi High Court conducted proceedings on a fast track with daily hearings conducted over 25 days. The trial court judgment was overturned, and Manu Sharma was found guilty of having murdered Lal. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.

Issue:

Whether an obscure telephonic message of a cognizable offence to be treated as FIR. ?

Observations by the Court:

The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the information given by any individual on telephone to the police is not for the purpose of lodging a First Information Report, but rather to request the police to reach the place of occurrence, whereas the information about the commission of an offence given in person by a witness or anybody else to the police is for the purpose of lodging a First Information Report. Phone calls made immediately after an incident to the police constitutes an F.I.R. only when they are not vague and cryptic.

 

Rohan Gupta
on 30 May 2020
Published in Others
Views : 160


 Recent Comments

Total: 0







×

  LAWyersclubindia Menu

Join the MasterClass     |    x