Delhi District Court
State vs Baljinder Singh on 20 August, 2018
1
IN THE COURT OF SH.NARINDER KUMAR:SPECIAL JUDGE
NDPS02(CENTRAL):TIS HAZARI COURTS:DELHI
S. C. No. 166/12
FIR No. 225/12
P.S. Sarai Rohilla
U/s 120, 223, 225, 328 and 34 IPC
In the matter of:
State
Versus
1. Baljinder Singh,
S/o Sh Baljit Singh,
R/o VPO, Bajakhana, PS Bajakhana,
Tehsil Jaito, District, Faridkot, Punjab.
2. Bhola Singh,
S/o Sh. Gandhi Singh,
R/o Village Sanghwan, PS Sadar Kot Kapura,
District Faridkot, Punjab.
3. Jarnail Singh,
S/o Sh Gurdeep Singh,
R/o H. No. 307, Bhulwala Road,
Gobind Nagar Basti, Punjab.
4. Gurmeet Singh,
S/o Sh. Sardar Maghar Singh,
R/o VPO Matta Tehsil Jaito,
District Faridkot, Punjab.
2
5. Deepak Dabas,
S/o Sh. Naresh,
R/o Pooth Khurd, Delhi 39
6. Neeraj @ Khan
S/o Satya Dev,
R/o H. No. 111, Village Pooth Khurd,
Delhi.
(Acquitted)
7. Surender Malik @ Nitu,
S/o Sh. Zile Singh,
R/o Village Daboda, Bahadur Garh,
(Proclaimed offender)
8. Vikram @ Paras @ Pradhan @ Goldy,
S/o Sh. Prem Singh,
R/o H. No. 500, Sector12, PhaseII,
Panipat, Haryana.
(since deceased)
9. Rajesh @ Kala Durmut,
S/o Sh. Maharvir Singh,
R/o H. No. 418, Village Pooth Khurd,
PS Bawana, Delhi & 1424A Village Pooth Khurd,
PS Bawana
(since deceased) ....Accused persons
Date of Institution: 21.12.2012
Date of Judgment : 17.08.2018
3
JUDGMENT
Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy (since deceased) was accused in case FIR No. 60/10 U/s 302 read with Section 34 IPC, PS Bawana, Outer Delhi District. He was highrisk accused because of his involvement not only in the said case but also in eight other cases.
2. Case of the prosecution is that Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy (since deceased) was in custody at Faridkot Jail being in custody in some other case. He is stated to have entered into criminal conspiracy with coaccused Surender Mailk (Proclaimed offender), Neeraj and Rajesh (since deceased) to escape from the custody of Punjab police and then escaped on 09.07.2012, on the day he was to be produced before Rohini Court Complex, Delhi, by HC Baljinder Singh 420/FDK, HC Gurmeet Singh 435/FDK, HC Jarnail Singh 531/FDK and ASI Bhola Singh 235/FDK, all Punjab Police officials, were posted at PS Police Lines, Faridkot, Punjab.
On 08.07.2012, all these four police officials on having deputed, took over custody of aforesaid Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy from Faridkot Jail for being brought to Delhi 4 for his production in the aforesaid case at Rohini Court Complex and for safe return to Faridkot Jail.
Case of the prosecution is that the aforesaid Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy was produced at Rohini Court only by ASI Bhola Singh and HC Jarnail Singh whereas their two companions namely HC Gurmeet Singh and HC Baljinder Singh remained behind at New Delhi Railway Station.
Case was registered on the statement of Sh. Kishore Ram, an autorickshaw driver whose autorickshaw was hired by SI Bhola Singh and HC Jarnail Singh from Pitampura on 09.07.2012 at about 1.30 pm for return journey.
Kishore Ram told the police that his auto rickshaw was hired by two police officials while one person was in their custody and in the handcuff. Further according to the witness, they boarded his auto telling him that they were to go New Delhi Railway Station. He started his TSR and on the way, the police official talked to someone and also allowed the prisoner to talk to someone. All of them were talking in Punjabi and as such he could not understand their conversation.
5Further according to auto rickshaw driver, when the auto rickshaw reached near Shashtri Nagar Metro Station, the prisoner got the auto stopped. Then the said prisoner accompanied by Sikh police official entered a Reebok Shop. At that time the prisoner was in handcuff. The other police official who appeared to be under the effect of intoxication, remained sleeping in the auto rickshaw. The sikh police official returned with the prisoner after about 1 - 1 ¼ hour but at that time the prisoner was without handcuff and he was holding articles which appeared to have been purchased. Both of them took seat in the auto. The prisoner took seat in between the two police officials. When he started the auto, Sikh police officials inquired about the handcuff. He then stopped the auto by the side of the road. Someone from Reebok shop came there with handcuff.
Again the auto started. However, the prisoner again got stopped the auto now to take water. At that time, all the three passengers alighted from the auto and took water from a rehdi. At that time, one vehicle (car) came there and the said prisoner entered the vehicle and made good his escape.
6Further according to the autorickshawdriver, then he and the two police officials chased the said vehicle. The vehicle stopped at the traffic light points because of red light signal. At that time, prisoner and the person, who was driving the said vehicle, came out of the vehicle and started running away. They were chased, in the auto rickshaw, but the prisoner and his companion had disappear.
Investigation was taken over by SI Kishore Kumar As per prosecution version on 09.07.2012, the Sub Inspector received DD No. 22A regarding the fact that Punjab Police officials had brought an accused but the accused fled away from their custody near traffic light points ahead Shashtri Nagar Metro Station.
On this information, SI Kishore Kumar alongwith Ct. Sachin reached near Shashtri Nagar Metro Station traffic light. There, Kishore Ramcomplainant met them and narrated the manner in which occurrence took place. Accused HC Jarnail Singh and ASI Bhola Singh, both of Punjab Police were also present there with said Kishore Ram.
Auto of Kishore Ram bearing registration no. DL 1RL 7058 and aforesaid vehicle i.e. car SX4 bearing 7 registration no. DL 8CP 0563 were also found lying parked by the side of the road.
SI Kishore Kumar got the case registered on the basis of statement of the autorickshaw driver. He inspected the spot and prepared the site map.
Accused ASI Bhola Singh of Punjab Police was found in possession of service revolver alongwith 20 cartridges. SI Kishore Kumar seized said ammunition, handcuff with chain and its key. Jail file and warrant file of accused Vikram were also seized, when produced by ASI Bhola Singh. One bag make Rebook containing one lower, two round shaped Tshirts and one collar TShirt were also seized when produced by ASI Bhola Singh.
Mobile Crime Team reached the spot and inspected the place of occurrence. Articles found in car no. DL 8CP 0563 were also seized.
ASI Bhola Singh, HC Jarnail Singh and complainant Kishore Ram were brought to police station.
HC Gurmeet Singh and HC Baljinder Singh, the remaining two officials of Punjab Police, were stated to be present at New Delhi Railway Station, while only ASI Bhola Singh and HC Jarnail Singh had brought the accused from 8 Railway Station to produce him before the Court.
SI Kishore Kumar informed the SHO about the availability of these two police officials at Railway Station. That is how, they were brought to P.S.Sarai Rohilla. HC Gurmeet was found in possession of SAF (SubMachine Gun) alongwith 25 live cartridges. Same were seized.
Case property alongwith arms and ammunition was deposited in the Malkhana of PS Sarai Rohilla. Accused persons were got admitted at Hindu Rao Hospital and got medically examined.
3. After compliance with provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C, case came to be committed to Court of Session.
Charge
4. Prima facie case having been made out, charge for offences u/s 120, Section 120 B read with Section 225 IPC, 225 read with section 328 IPC and Section 34 IPC Section 120B IPC, 223 read with Section 34 IPC Section 120B IPC was framed against the accused persons.
Since accused persons pleaded "not guilty" and claimed trial, prosecution opened the case by leading 9 evidence.
Prosecution evidence
5. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined following witnesses: PW1: HC Ram Pal.
PW2: Sh. Kishore Ram PW3: Sh. Manoj Pal @ vicky PW4: Sh. Pramod Kumar PW5: Sh. Sushil Kumar PW6: HC Laxmi Narain PW7: HC Sachin PW8: HC Ompal PW9: ASI Raj Bahadur PW10: Dr. S. K. Prashad PW11: HC Gurtej Singh PW12 : Ct. Satpal PW13 : Ct. Sant Kumar PW14: Ct. Parveen PW15: Ct. Mehar Singh PW16: Dr. Anil Kumar Banka PW17: HC Vijay Kumar PW18: Dr. M. M. Mehra PW19: ASI Vipin Kumar 10 PW20: Inspector Ramesh Sharma PW21: SI Kishore Kumar PW22: ASI Vijay Singh PW23: Sh. Chander Shekhar PW24: Sh. Rajeev Ranjan PW25: Sh. Sudhir Kumar PW26: SI Sanjay Kaushik Statement under Section 313 CrPC
6. When examined under section 313 Cr.P.C, accused persons denied all the incriminating evidence against them and claimed false implication. Despite opportunity, they have opted not to lead any evidence in defence.
7. Arguments heard. File perused.
Discussion Undisputed facts
8. Undisputed facts of this case are that Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy (since deceased) was accused in case FIR No. 60/10 U/s 302 read with Section 34 IPC, PS Bawana, Outer Delhi District. He was highrisk accused because of 11 his involvement not only in the said case but also in eight other cases. Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy (since deceased) was in custody at Faridkot Jail being in custody in other case.
On 09.07.2012, said Vikram was to be produced before Rohini Court Complex, Delhi.
9. Admittedly, HC Baljinder Singh, HC Gurmeet Singh , HC Jarnail Singh and ASI Bhola Singh, all accused hereinPunjab Police officials, having their posting at Police Lines, Faridkot, Punjab, took over custody of said Vikram on 08.07.2012 from Faridkot Jail, Punjab for his production before the Court at Rohini Courts Complex.
On 08.07.2012, all these four police officials on having been deputed, took over custody of aforesaid Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy from Faridkot Jail for being brought to Delhi for his production in the aforesaid case at Rohini Court Complex and for safe return to Faridkot Jail. At that time, accused Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy was in handcuffs.
From the statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.PC it can be gathered that all of them boarded trainPunjab Mail on 8.7.2012 at about 10 pm and 12 reached New Delhi Railway Station. There, ASI Bhola Singh and HC Jarnail Singh, with the aforesaid prisoner in the custody in handcuffs, reached Rohini Court complex while their two companions HC Gurmeet Singh and HC Baljinder Singh remained behind. The prisoner was produced before the concerned court at Rohini Court complex only by the two police officials. After adjournment of the case, the two police officials with said prisoner in their custody in handcuffs reached the area of Pitampura, Delhi, from where they hired the TSR of Kishore Ram.
To pick up the thread after the undisputed facts, here it would be just to refer to the statement of said auto driver Kishore Ram to specify as to what he has stated regarding the manner in which the undertrial prisoner escape.
According to PW1 Kishore Ram in the year 2012, he used to drive TSR No. DL 1RL7058. He could not remember the date and month. But, he remembered that 1 or 1.30 p.m, he was coming from the side of Rohini to go to New Delhi Railway Station, without passenger. When he reached Madhuban Chowk, two police officials in police uniform (one sikh and other was nonsikh with one 13 prisoner duly handcuffed were found standing at Madhuban Chowk and they got his TSR stopped and boarded telling him that they were to go New Delhi Railway Station. In Court, he correctly identified the two police officials, who are SI Bhola Singh and HC Jarnail Singh.
He went on to narrate that he started his TSR and on the way after crossing flyover which led to Ashok Vihar, prisoner in their custody expressed desire to urinate. By the side of road, he stopped his TSR when asked by the police officials. At that time, one police official remained in the TSR, other police official got down from the TSR with the prisoner. After the prisoner finished urinating, he and police officials boarded the TSR. Again they started their journey.
Further, according to Sh. Kishore Ram, on the way there was a Reebok showroom. Prisoner took mobile phone from one of the police officials. He then made a call from the said phone to someone in Punjabi language, with which he (PW1) was not conversant.
Prisoner then expressed desire to police official that he was to purchase some articles from Reebok showroom. At the instance of police officials, he (PW2) 14 again stopped his TSR . While one police official non sikh remained sitting inside the TSR, the other police official sikh accompanied the prisoner and they entered the showroom. At that time, prisoner was in handcuffs.
According to the TSR driver, he waited at the said place for about 6075 minutes. After that, Sikh police official and prisoner came out of the showroom, but, at that time prisoner was not in handcuffs. He was carrying carry bags in his hands. Both of them boarded the TSR.
After some time nonsikh police official became semi unconscious.
When TSR reached Shashtri Nagar Metro Station, the prisoner desired to have water. At the request of prisoner, they stopped TSR by the side of the road. According to complainant, two police officials and the prisoner drank water from a rehdi. At that time, Sikh police official inquired prisoner regarding whereabout of the handcuff. The prisoner replied that handcuffs were left at the showroom.
According to the complainant, in the meanwhile, one boy from Reebok showroom came there with handcuff and handed over same to police official. But, the prisoner 15 was not handcuffed by the police officials. The journey started and TSR travelled a short distance i.e. only 1015 paces when in the meanwhile one Maruti car came at high speed. While the Maruti car was still in moving condition, all of a sudden, the frontside gate of the car was opened and the prisoner, sitting inside the TSR, jumped from the TSR, boarded the said car and fled away.
Police officials raised alarm "bhag gaya bhag gaya".
10. PW1 went on to narrate that he chased the said maruti car. Because of red light signal ahead, maruti car stopped. TSR was also stopped. But then he saw driver of the maruti car and the prisoner getting down from the maruti car and both of them started running. NonSikh police official then got down from the TSR, while Sikh police official remained in the TSR and asked him (Kishore Ram) to chase the driver of the maruti car and the prisoner, who could be seen running. He chased them. But they disappeared somewhere and could not be traced.
According to PW1, he accompanied by the sikh Police officials returned to the spot where Maruti car was 16 standing. Someone informed police dialing no. 100. Delhi Police reached there and made inquiries.
PW1 has also deposed about making of statement before the police and seizure of case property i.e. the articles produced by the Punjab police officials and the articles seized from the car, which was at the traffic light signals.
Prosecution evidence about arrival of Delhi Police at the spot, seizure of articles produced by Punjab Police officials and the articles from the car, in presence of the TSR driver(PW1) lends corroboration to the version narrated by PW1.
Court does not find any reason to disbelieve the cogent and convincing testimony of PW1 on any of the aspects. Simply, because PW1 stated to have made statement at the police station is no ground to disbelieve what stands recorded in his statement before the police, the reason being that PW1 has fully supported the initial version while deposing before the Court. The argument advanced to disbelieve the statement of PW1, because of the difference in his version about the place where his statement was recorded, does not come to help the accused.
17There is nothing on record to suggest that PW1 was inimical against any of the accused or interested in the prosecution to help the police. He is an independent witness. There is no reason to discard his testimony on any of the aspects.
11. One of the contentions is that there is contradiction in the statement of PW1 as to the manner in which handcuffs were collected by the police officials after one of them and the prisoner returned from the Reebok showroom having made purchases from there.
True, according to official of Reebok showroom the handcuff was returned by him having come out of the showroom.
But, according to PW1, police official had gone to the showroom and collected the handcuff and then returned to the TSR. But, this is not a material contradiction. The fact remains that it does not create any doubt in the version of PW1 and statements of officials from Reebok show room that the prisoner, duly handcuffed, and one police official entered the showroom, made purchases from there and that handcuff was removed inside the showroom, and further 18 that when they came out they were without handcuff, which was collected soon thereafter.
The contention that no CCTV footage was gathered from the showroom is also of no avail to the accused. The reason is that evidence of the official of the showroom is clear that CCTV camaras were out of order. Even otherwise, in absence of electronic evidence, the relevant facts which occurred outside and inside the showroom stand duly proved.
Defence plea
12. In their statements under section 313 Cr.PC, accused persons have come up with the plea that ASI Bhola Singh brought two bottles of juice at Faridkot before they boarded the train. One of the bottles was allegedly used by companions of ASI Bhola Singh whereas the other bottle was kept in the bag of Jarnail Singh.
But, this plea does not stand proved. Accused have not led any defence evidence to substantiate the same.
Ex PW10/B, Ex PW16/B and Ex PW10/8 - MLCs of Baljinder Singh, Gurmeet Singh and Jarnail Singh are dated 10.07.2012, 09.07.2012 and 09.07.2012 respectively.
19Jarnail Singh was medically examined at 8.50 pm, Gurmeet Singh at 11.45 pm and Baljinder Singh at 12.05 am on the night intervening 910.07.2012.
As per oral examination, the doctor found that these three police officials were drowsy. Vide Ex PW18/C, Ex PW18/D and Ex PW18/E, the doctor opined "? Unknown poisoning". From the medical evidence, finally it can safely be said that the doctor was not certain while so opining. Secondly, in view of the time of their medical examination, it is difficult to say that at the time all the police officials reached New Delhi Railway Station by train, they were drowsy.
It is true that PW1 stated that when he started TSR from near the Reebok showroom, nonsikh police official (who had not entered the showroom and remained present in the TSR) had become semi conscious. But it does not lead to any inference that even earlier he was semi unconscious. PW1 nowhere stated that the sikh police official was semi unconscious.
No evidence is on record to suggest that at the time the two police officials left New Delhi Railway Station with the prisoner, anyone of them was under the influence 20 of any intoxicating or other substance.
Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that any of the police officialssikh or nonsikhwas under the influence of any intoxicating substance at the time the two produced the prisoner before the Court at Rohini Court Complex. They produced him before the Learned Presiding Officer and presence of the prisoner stands recorded in the order dated 9.7.2012.
Even otherwise, not even an iota of evidence suggests that any of the four police official was administered any intoxicating or stupefying or poisonous substance or other thing against their will ever since they took over custody of the undertrial from Faridkot jail.
13. Section 223 IPC provides punishment where a public servant legally bound as such public servant to keep in confinement any person charged with or convicted of any offence or lawfully committed to custody, negligently suffers such person to escape from confinement.
As noticed above, prosecution has proved that Vikram @ Goldy @ Paras was an undertrial prisoner, whose custody was delivered to the four police officials accused 21 herein, at Faridkot Jail for his production before the Court at Rohini court complex. All of them were legally bound to keep him in confinement and on return from Delhi to hand over his custody to the officers of Faridkot Jail.
Here, prosecution has fully proved that all the four accused persons were negligent and they suffered escape of the said undertrial prisoner due to their negligence. HC Baljinder and HC Gurmeet Singh opted to stay at New Delhi Railway Station. They were not permitted by anyone to stay behind at New Delhi Railway Station. In the given situation, even if HC Baljinder Singh and HC Gurmeet Singh remained behind at New Delhi Railway Station and they were not with the undertrial prisoner at the time he escaped, they cannot escape their liability as they have failed to bring on record any material to suggest that for such and such reason, they could not and did not accompany the undertrial prisoner and their two companions to Rohini Court complex, so as to diligently perform the duty assigned to them.
As regards ASI Bhola Singh and HC Jarnail Singh, they have failed to, and cannot, at all justify their stoppage during transit i.e. on the way from Madhuban 22 Chowk, Rohini, at Reebok Showroom, so as to allow the undertrial prisoner to make purchases from the said showroom, while removing his handcuffs. It was not part of their duty to allow the undertrial prisoner to enter the show room on way back from the Court house. They were so negligent that even after the purchase was made at the showroom, the handcuff was left at the said showroom and one of the employees of the said showroom had to bring the handcuffs. The negligence did not end here. Even after the undertrial prisoner occupied seat in the TSR, he was not handcuffed by anyone of them.
In view of the above discussion, Court finds that prosecution has fully established its case against all the four Punjab Police officials for an offence under Section 223 IPC.
14. From the material available on record, court finds that prosecution has failed to prove that any of these police officials entered into any criminal conspiracy any of the coaccused in the escape of Vikram @ Goldy @ Paras. Therefore, none of them can be held guilty for an offence under Section 120B IPC.
So far as the offence under Section 328 IPC is 23 concerned, for want of any allegation that any of the four officials administered any intoxicating or stupefying substance to Vikram @ Goldy @ Paras, it cannot said that anyone of them committed such a crime punishable under Section 328 IPC.
As a result, all these four Punjab Police officials are hereby convicted only for the offence under Section 223 IPC.
15. So far as Neeraj accused is concerned, he has already been acquitted at the stage of recording of statement of accused persons under Section 313 CrPC, the reason being that nothing incriminating was brought on record by the prosecution against the said accused.
Involvement of Deepak accused
16. So far as Deepak accused is concerned, he has been facing trial on the accusation that on or about 09.07.2012, he, his coaccused Surender Malik (since proclaimed offender), Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy (since deceased), Neeraj @ Khan (since acquitted), Rajesh (since deceased) and the four police officials - accused, entered 24 into criminal conspiracy for rescue of Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy from judicial custody.
The person who, according to PW2 Kishore Ram was seen driving the Maruti Car, in which Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy made good his escape, was Rajesh (since deceased).
According to PW21, SI Kishore Kumar, accused Rajesh (since deceased) had identified Surender @ Neetu (since proclaimed offender) and Deepak as his associates in commission of the offence. But PW21 could not collect any evidence to suggest participation of Deepak accused. Ex. PW21/C is copy of the entry made in the register maintained at Aggarwal Seva Sadan, Salasar, Rajasthan. This entry does not depict name of Deepak as one of the five persons who stayed at the said Dharamshala on 10.07.2012. Therefore, it cannot be said that he aided Vikram @ Paras @ Goldy in his concealment at the said dharamshala.
PW23 Nodal Officer from Bharti Airtel has been examined to prove that mobile phone no. 9958289795 was in the name of Smt. Santosh, W/o Naresh, R/o Village Phootkhurd. But no evidence has been led by the 25 prosecution to show any connection of Deepak accused with this mobile phone. CDR of this mobile phone does not suggest its use by Deepak accused so as to say that he was in contact with any of the aforesaid coaccused, by way of any conspiracy.
Prosecution has not led any other evidence to prove that any role was played by the Deepak accused.
As a result, accused Deepak is hereby acquitted in this case.
17. Let the four convicts be heard on the point of sentence.
Digitally signed by NARINDER KUMARNARINDER Announced in the open Court KUMAR Date:
2018.08.21 10:24:29 on this 17th day of August, 2018 +0530 (NARINDER KUMAR) SPECIAL JUDGE2 NDPS ACT:
(CENTRAL DISTRICT) TIS HAZARI COURT:DELHI