STATE V. SIDDARTH VASHISTH @ MANU SHARMA AND ORS., AIR 2010 SUPREME COURT 2352

The Supreme Court held that the appellate court had all the requisite power to re-evaluate all the evidence that was presented in the Court of Trial and reconsider the order of acquittal passed by the Court of Trial and justifying the action of reversing the order acquittal with adequate reasoning. The Court stated that the prosecution of the case did establish the charges against Manu S4harma and Eight other accused beyond doubt, and that the Supreme court agrees with the decision of the first court and reversed the order of acquittal into one of conviction.
The Supreme Court stated that all the appeals were devoid of every merit and were dismissed.The court held that the order of acquittal should only be interfered by the higher appellate court when it undergoes some significant weaknesses and only if the court believes that the evidence has been ignored or misread by the lower court.
Breach of duty of disclosure by the Public Prosecutor, under the common and procedural law Principles which are relevant, does not vitiate the entire trial. And telephonic calls which could be considered as the first initial information are those which cannot come under the term of being cryptic and vague.

The case stated and discussed a crucial aspect of Communication of first initial information to police. In the judgement it was observed that the two telephonic communications that were made to the Mehrauli police stations were not clear about the commission of offence and were termed as vague and cryptic communications, which cannot constitute anFIR. The Court held that “Phone calls immediately after an incident to the police constitutes an FIR unless they are not vague and cryptic.”

-->