Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Ram Pyari vs State Of Haryana . on 4 May, 2017
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice, D.Y. Chandrachud, Sanjay Kishan Kaul
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO.159 OF 2015
RAM PYARI ... PETITIONER(S)
VS.
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ... RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. On 7.9.2015, pursuant to the writ petition filed by the petitioner, the following motion Bench order was passed:
“Issue notice returnable in two weeks. In view of the serious allegations made against the 3rd respondent, we direct the first respondent to take necessary steps to shift the petitioner's daughter namely, Babita who is in the custody of the 3rd respondent as an undertrial prisoner in case FIR No.429/2014 and 430/2014, P.S. Barwala, dist. Hisar, from Central Jail No.2, Hisar to any other jail in the State of Haryana.
A copy of this order be communicated to the Chief Secretary of the State of Haryana, today and Chief Secretary is directed to report compliance by Wednesday the 9th September, 2015.”
2. One of the persons impleaded in the writ petition was Respondent No.3, Shamsher Singh Dahiya. The allegations were primarily levelled by the petitioner against the said Signature Not Verified ..2/-
Digitally signed by SARITA PUROHIT Date: 2017.05.11 16:23:08 IST Reason: 1.2.
Shamsher Singh Dahiya. Shamsher Singh Dahiya has filed a detailed counter affidavit, wherein he has made the following averments :
“I-C. That the third allegation in the present petition is totally false and motivated and the answering respondent never visited the Jail on the intervening night of 30.07.2015 and never called Babita in his room at 11.30 pm. The allegations have been made with mala fide intention at the instance of one Sant Rampal who is confined in Central Jail-II Hisar against whom seven FIRs have been registered under various provisions of law including waging war against State and murder. When the said self-styled Godman Rampal did not appear before the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court on various dates, non bailable warrants of arrest against said Rampal were issued, but the Police could not execute the warrants as large number of disciples of so called Godman Rampal armed with deadly weapons gathered at the Sat Lok Ashram Barwala (Hisar) where Rampal has taken shelter. Again warrant of arrest were issued for the arrest of said Rampal. The said Ashram turned into a war Zone when thousands of the State Police as well as Central Police Force men and Rampal's followers fought a pitched battle as the Police tried to enter the Ashram to arrest Rampal. The violence left over 200 injured and many were died. During investigation it has come to know that Babita daughter of the petitioner was one of the closest members of the core group of advisors of said Rampal and she has been an accomplish in commission of all the offences along with Rampal.
As per the records three FIRs under various sections including waging war against the State and murder have been registered against petitioner's daughter Babita resident of Ward No.12 Luxmi Vihar Colony Barwala. The details of the FIRs registered against Babita are under :-
..3/-2
.3.
i) FIR No.428 dated 18.11.2014, U/s 107/147/ 148/149/186/188/120-B/121/121-A/122/123/124/125/ 332/353/326-A/435/333/342/307/436 IPC & 25/54/ 59 A.Act PS Barwala,
(ii) FIR No.429 dated 19.11.2014, U/s 343/302/ 120-B IPC, PS Barwala,
iii) FIR No.430 dated 19.11.2014, U/s 343/302/ 120-B IPC PS Barwala.
Before his arrest said Rampal used to lavish lifestyle and in the jail also he was demanding the same. When his demands were not exceeded by the answering respondent he started levelling false allegations against respondent no.3 and also sought transfer from Central Jail-II to Central Jail-I, Hisar. The complaints were made before the court of Ld Judicial Magistrate 1 st Class, Hisar, before the Hon'ble Lokayukta and before Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court. In the complaint filed before the Ld. Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Hisar, the answering respondent filed his reply denying the allegations stating that the respondent no.3 has no interest in any under trial prisoner except their safety in jail and he had no objection if said complainant was transferred anywhere as the Ld. Court deemed fit and appropriate. However, after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and the court of Ld. Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Hisar dismissed the complaint vide order dated 23.02.2015. A copy of the order dated 23.02.2015 is attached herewith as Annexure R-3/2 (pg 34-36).
That when said self styled Godman Rampal not succeeded in his motive then he is using said Babita and her family as a tool to settle the score with answering respondent by levelling false and frivolous allegations only to ensure the transfer/removal of answering respondent and to implicate him in a false and frivolous case through his close aide-Babita i.e. daughter of the petitioner. However, in compliance of the orders passed by Hon'ble Apex Court on dated ..4/-
3.4.
07.09.2015, the above said female under trial prisoner Babita has been transferred to District Jail, Jind on 08.09.2015.
xxx xxx xxx
4. That it is humbly submitted that there are (05) five Barracks inside the Female Ward for keeping/lodging of the female inmates. Presently (15) fifteen female warders are posted at Central Jail-II, Hisar for the security of Fema le Ward who remain on duty at round the clock. One senior most female warder Ms. Mukesh Belt No.1809 is deputed as In-charge of Female Ward along with three Female warders on duty during day time and 02 female warders at night along with two female convicts in each barrack as Nigran. No male officer/official is allowed to enter inside the Female Ward during day or night. Patrolling officer/official take the report of “Sub Achha” from outside the main gate which is being duly locked from outside as well inside during the evening lock up time.
It is further submitted that the keys of the female ward along with keys of each barrack and Bramda are handed over to Deputy Superintendent Jail (Maintenance) after lock up of the Jail and only in case of emergency the Female Ward could be opened at night in the presence of the Deputy Superintendent Jail and two female warders with due information to the Superintendent Jail.
Under trial prisoner Babita was lodged in Barrack No.5 alongwith 14 other female prisoners on 30.07.2015. On the night of 30.07.2015, the following Female warders/female convicts as Nigran were on duty at Female Ward :-
Sr. Name of Warder/Female Time Place of Duty No. Warder
1. Female Warder Nirmla Belt Lock up to Female Ward No.1849 lock out xxx xxx xxxx
4. Female convict Babita w/o Whole Night Female Ward as Rajesh Nigran at Barrack No.2 ..5/-4
.5.
Hence under these circumstances, it is not possible that female under trial prisoner Babita could be brought out separately from her Barrack during the night or day without the following procedure as prescribed in the Jail Manual.
5. That the allegations made by said Babita also falsify from the fact that there is no entry of answering respondent in register no.16 on the intervening night of 30.07.2015. As per the provisions of the Punjab Jail Manual a Register No.16 is maintained inside the Jail gate in every Jail in the State of Haryana which is a permanent record in which entry of every officer/officials or any other persons with time and date are strictly made who come inside and go outside the Jail premises. The said Register No.16 is duly maintained by the officials on duty in the day time as well as at night. Photocopy of the entries made from 29.07.2015 to 31.07.2015 of Register No.16 are annexed herewith for the kind perusal of the Hon'ble Court are as Annexure R-3/3 (pg 37-95).
6. That the answering respondent and his family is under life threat from the gangs of hard core criminals and have been duly provided with security cover by the State Police with sophisticated weapons on the secret information available with the State Security Agencies. Due to security reasons close circuit TV (CCTV's) cameras have been installed at the residence of answering respondent to keep an eye on the visitors or unknown persons. From the footage of CCTV cameras on 30.07.2015 it is clear that the answering respondent did not go out from his house till the morning of 31 July 2015. On 30.07.2015, the answering respondent entered his house/residence at 8:02 P.M., after that the respondent No.3 came out from his house/residence on 31.07.2015 at 10:08 A.M. for going on duty at Central Jail-2, Hisar. A copy of the extract data available in the hard disk from dated 30.07.2015 to 31.07.2015 and photos are attached herewith as Annexure R 3/4 (pg 96-98).” (Emphasis is ours) ..6/-
5.6.
The stands adopted by Respondent NO.3 in the counter affidavit filed before this Court, would possibly reveal, that the allegations levelled against him by the petitioner were false and incorrect.
3. Undoubtedly, the FIR registered at the behest of the petitioner needs an effective investigation. However, the investigation would be effective, only when the position indicated by Respondent No.3 is fully taken into consideration, and it is only then that the investigation can be considered to be complete.
4. We are informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, which position is affirmed also by the learned Additional Solicitor General, representing the State of Haryana, that a 'closure report' has been submitted by the Police, with reference to the FIRs registered against Respondent No.3, consequent upon the allegations levelled by the petitioner. This determination at the hands of the State Government is sought to be assailed (by the petitioner) on the basis of the decision rendered by this Court in Bhagwat Singh Vs. Commissioner of Police & Anr., (1985) 2 SCC 537, wherein, this Court had asserted, that before a Magistrate gives effect to a 'closure report' submitted by the Police, it is imperative to issue a notice ..7/-
6.7.
to the concerned complainant, and to seek the response of the complainant. Only thereafter, a sustainable order can be passed by the concerned Magistrate.
5. We find justification in the contention advanced at the hands of the learned counsel for the petitioner. We hereby direct, that when the matter is placed before the Magistrate with reference to the 'closure report' submitted by the Police, it would be imperative for the Magistrate to issue notice to the petitioner, and only thereafter the Magistrate will take a final decision on the issue.
6. However, keeping in view the position expressed hereinabove, we are of the view, that the assertions made by Respondent No.3 in the counter affidavit, particularly those which have been extracted hereinabove, also need to be investigated. We are of the view, that report of the Police would be complete and effective for consideration of the Magistrate, only after the investigation is carried out to that effect as well. We therefore direct the Police to complete the investigation in the matter, in the manner expressed above. And only thereafter, take such further action as may be considered appropriate, in consonance with law.
..8/-
7.8.
7. The writ petition is disposed of, in the above terms.
......................CJI.
[JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR] ......................J. [Dr. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD] ......................J. [SANJYA KISHAN KAUL] New Delhi;
4th May, 2017.
8 ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.1 SECTION X
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition (Criminal) No(s).159/2015 RAM PYARI Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. Respondent(s) (With appln.(s) for directions) Date : 04/05/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL For Petitioner(s) Ms. Indira Jaising,Sr.Adv.
Mr. Praveen Chaturvedi,Adv.
Ms. Jyoti Chaturvedi,Adv.
Mr. Rohit Ghosh,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Tushar Mehta,ASG State Mr. B.K. Satija,Adv.(AAG) Ms. Swati Ghildiyal,Adv.
Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka,Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the signed order.
(Sarita Purohit) (Renuka Sadana) Court Master Assistant Registrar (Signed order is placed on the file) 9