Research › Browse › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

1986 DIGILAW 603 (RAJ)

Abdul Vahid v. State of Rajasthan

1986-09-17

G.M.LODHA

body1986
GUMAN MAL LODHA, J—This is a criminal miscellaneous petition No. 410 of 1986 A letter was received by this Court from one Abdul Vaheed son of Ramzan Khan Assistant, Agriculture officer, Baran requesting that the investi-gation of F.I.R. No. 133 of 1986 registered at police station Baran District Kota be directed to be conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation. 2. The applicants in his representation annexed to this letter to this court has submitted that on 10.4.86 at about 5 p.m. he was informed then his son Maru is being taken in police jeep to hospital and either the S.H.O. himself of his son has shot him dead. A complaint was filed in the police station, on 19.4.1986 and an F.I.R. No.133 of 1986 was registered for offence under Section 304-A of the I.P.C. The police has ultimately come to the conclusion that, the Investi-gation has revealed that it was a case of suicide by accidental, death since the deceased wanted to see the revolver. The investigation, was handed over to the C.I.D. on a complaint by the applicant Abdul Vaheed and the police department after investigation by Intelligence Branch have filed a final report in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baran, mentioning that it is a case of accidental death by revolver. 3. When this letter reached this court it was registered as criminal case this court appointed Shri Mahesh Gupta Advocate Amicus Curaei on 29th August,1986 for assisting the court. Unfortunately Shri Mahesh Gupta has chosen not to appear in court to assist the court. 4. In his absence I have taken the assistance of Mr. Ajay Purohit counsel for the state and have gone through the record of the police investigation from the police diary. 5. The conclusion drawn by the C.I.D. Investgation is that the deceased Mara aged 18-19 years went to the House of the accused Dhirendra father Nand Ram who is S.H.O. Baran and insisted that he would like to see the revolver which was lying in the safe. The accused, Dhirendra then took, out the revolver and the deceased first pressed the tragger but when it did, not work, then the deceased Mam continued to try with and in that process the tragger was pressed when Dhirendra was outside. The accused, Dhirendra then took, out the revolver and the deceased first pressed the tragger but when it did, not work, then the deceased Mam continued to try with and in that process the tragger was pressed when Dhirendra was outside. Dhirendra came running on hearing the noice of the shot and then found that Maru was having one hand on his chest and the other on the stomach and suddenly he fell dawn. The accused come in the police station and told people about this and they rushed to the spot and took the deceased to the Hospital. 6. Dhirendra is boy of 13 years. The investigating Agency came to the conclusion that the Conduct of Dhirendra in mainting his composer and patience and informing people and not loosing balance of mind shows that he was not involved in the incident. The investigating agency also, took support from the distance and the range and the direction from which firing took place five, or, six. circumstances have been taken in to consideration, for giving the final report. The final report has been submitted to the C.J.M. Baran and is yet to, be accepted. It was sent on 27.8.1986 or so. 7. From the statement of the father of the deceased it appears that there was one boy who saw Dhirendra firing at the deceased. It appears that one Kalu told father of the deceased that the firing took place when Dhirendra pressed the trigger of the revolver. This finds place in the statements of Iqbal son of Yameen 31 years father of Kalu. 8. The Case has attained serious dimensions because the accused is son of Nand Ram S.H.O. Baran in whose residential house this occurrence, took place, in the premises of police station. The father of deceased insist that it was a case of murder and not accidental death. 9. It is very difficult for this court to make any observation either way . because the-investigation conducted by the intelligence Department of the Police, is based an circumstances and from that inference has been drawn, that it was art accidental death in which the deceased himself pressed the trigger of revolver. 10. Having heard Mr. 9. It is very difficult for this court to make any observation either way . because the-investigation conducted by the intelligence Department of the Police, is based an circumstances and from that inference has been drawn, that it was art accidental death in which the deceased himself pressed the trigger of revolver. 10. Having heard Mr. Purohit learned Public Prosecutor and after going through the record, I am of the opinion that it would be expedient in the interest of justice and to ensure confidence in the litigants as well as people as a whole that the .State Government take initiative for requesting the Central Bureau of investigation to investigate-this case. 11. Of course, I would hot like to issue a writ or direction compelling the State Government to do so because-of the fact that the record available before, this court is scanty and the State Government is required to consider various circumstances and facts on" this aspect. 12. It is well known principal of law and justice that justice should not only be done but it must appear to have been done.. When a death has taken place in mysterious circumstances in the room of, a police officer, in the police station and a revolver of the police officer is used and it is suggested that it contains the finger prints of the accused Dhirendra then it is in the interest of all concerned including the S.H.O. himself, the accused, the police administration and the State administration that clouds of an attempt to suppress the facts and to conceal and protect the accused, as alleged are covered, by a proper investigation of some agency is not in anyway be influenced and cannot be said to be biased and partial in favour of the police. These are the circumstances which should not weight any other consideration and it is expected that the State Government would make a reference for investigation of this case to the Central Bureau of Investigation. 13. Since the final report has been given by the Intelligence Branch of State Police the C.J.M. is directed not to accept it and await for decision of the State Government, in respect of the reference to the Central Bureau of Investigation. 13. Since the final report has been given by the Intelligence Branch of State Police the C.J.M. is directed not to accept it and await for decision of the State Government, in respect of the reference to the Central Bureau of Investigation. It is further desired that the complainant the father of the deceased should be intimated by the C.J.M. Baran of the final report given by the Intelligence Department of the Police of Rajasthan and he should be allowed to assist the investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation Delhi, as and when reference is made by the State Government, it is expected that the above observations and the views expressed by this court would be respected in the interest of all concerned. The application is decided accordingly.