Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:

Table of Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 6 The present appeals .......................................................................................................................... 7 Transfer of the trial to Delhi............................................................................................................. 8 Charges ............................................................................................................................................. 8 Convictions and sentences awarded by the trial Court .................................................................... 9 Before this Court ............................................................................................................................ 11 The demographic composition of Mirchpur .................................................................................. 14 Incident of 19th April 2010 ............................................................................................................. 15 20th April 2010 ................................................................................................................................ 16 Incident of 21st April 2010 ............................................................................................................. 17 Charge sheets .................................................................................................................................. 20 Findings of the trial Court .............................................................................................................. 21 Summary of trial Court's findings ................................................................................................. 33 Submissions on behalf of the State ................................................................................................ 34 Submissions on behalf of the complainants ................................................................................... 43 Causal link between incidents of 19th and 21st April 2010 ............................................................ 46 The incident of 21st April 2010: the Trial Court's findings ........................................................... 49 This Court's analysis of the incidents of 21st April 2010 .............................................................. 54 Site plans & photographic and videographic evidence.................................................................. 63 Unlawful assembly with a common object .................................................................................... 71 Applicability of the POA Act......................................................................................................... 75 Section 3(1)(x) POA Act ................................................................................................................ 77 Section 3(1)(xv) POA Act .............................................................................................................. 78 Section 3(2)(iii) and (iv) POA Act ................................................................................................. 79 Section 3(2)(v) POA Act ................................................................................................................ 80 Section 8 POA Act ......................................................................................................................... 84 This Court's findings with respect to the POA Act ....................................................................... 85 Leading questions........................................................................................................................... 86 Eye witness testimonies ................................................................................................................. 88 Test Identification Parade .............................................................................................................. 92 Delay in recording statements of witnesses ................................................................................... 96 Lapses in investigation ................................................................................................................... 98 Conduct of witnesses.................................................................................................................... 100 Statements before the Commission of Inquiry ............................................................................ 101 Scientific evidence v. ocular evidence ......................................................................................... 103 Irrelevant considerations in rejecting testimony .......................................................................... 105 Numerical rule in respect of Section 149 IPC ............................................................................. 106 Analysis of eye-witness testimonies ............................................................................................ 108 Kamala (PW-50) .......................................................................................................... 109 Amar Lal (CW-1) ......................................................................................................... 114 Pradeep (PW-49) .......................................................................................................... 115 Rajbir (PW-10) ............................................................................................................. 117 Sunita (PW-13)............................................................................................................. 118 Sandeep (PW-28) ......................................................................................................... 118 Sheela (PW-32) ............................................................................................................ 118 Santra (PW-30)............................................................................................................. 119 Rani (PW-33), Sanjay (PW-36), and Meena (PW-37) ................................................ 119 Mahajan (PW-38), Sube Singh (PW-39), and Vijender (PW-40) ............................... 121 Dhoop Singh (PW-29) ................................................................................................. 122 Vicky (PW-42) ............................................................................................................. 123 Dilbagh (PW-43) .......................................................................................................... 127 Sanjay (PW-44) ............................................................................................................ 127 Manoj (PW-45) ............................................................................................................ 128 Satyawan (PW-47) and Gulaba (PW-48) .................................................................... 129 Dying declarations of Tara Chand ............................................................................................... 130 Analysis of defence witnesses...................................................................................................... 134 Murder or culpable homicide? ..................................................................................................... 135 Accused persons convicted by the trial Court ............................................................................. 140 A-34: Rajender son of Pale .......................................................................................... 140 A-38: Kulwinder son of Ram Mehar ........................................................................... 146 A-20: Ramphal son of Prithvi ...................................................................................... 149 A-3: Karambir son of Tara Chand ............................................................................... 153 A-25: Karampal son of Satbir ...................................................................................... 154 A-13: Dharambir son of Mai Chand ............................................................................ 156 A-27: Sumit son of Satyawan ...................................................................................... 158 A-64: Pradeep son of Jaibir.......................................................................................... 158 A-90: Rajpal son of Sheo Chand ................................................................................. 159 A-65: Pradeep son of Suresh........................................................................................ 159 A-41: Sunil son of Dayanand ....................................................................................... 160 A-39: Monu son of Suresh ........................................................................................... 161 A-58: Jasbir @ Lillu son of Raja ................................................................................. 162 Accused persons acquitted by the trial Court .............................................................................. 163 Respondents represented by Mr. M.N. Dudeja ............................................................................ 165 A-22: Pradeep son of Balwan ...................................................................................... 167 A-77: Sanjay @ Handa son of Dayanand .................................................................... 168 A-78: Satyawan @ Satta Singh son of Karan Singh ................................................... 169 Respondents represented by Mr. Ajay Verma ............................................................................. 170 A-89: Jokhar @ Joginder son of Inder Singh .............................................................. 170 A-83: Sonu @ Monu son of Ramesh ........................................................................... 170 Rajesh son of Dhupa (A-43), Sanjay @ Sandeep son of Amar Lal (A-76), Jitender son of Satbir (A-53), Kuldeep @ Midda son of Balbir (A-15), and Naseeb son of Prem Singh (A-60)................................................................................................................. 171 Respondents represented by Mr. Sudarshan Rajan ...................................................................... 172 A-1: Dharambir son of Tara Chand ............................................................................. 177 A-29: Roshan Lal son of Ram Swaroop ...................................................................... 177 A-79: Satish son of Randhir ......................................................................................... 178 A-52: Jogal @ Doger son of Hawa Singh ................................................................... 178 A-66: Pradeep son of Satbir ......................................................................................... 179 Pradeep son of Jagbir (A-63), Suresh Kumar son of Balbir (A-18), and Dalbir son of Dalip Singh (A-5)......................................................................................................... 180 Respondents represented by Mr. Anupam Sharma ...................................................................... 180 A-95: Jagdish @ Jangla son of Lahna Ram @ Lakshman .......................................... 181 A-33: Rajinder son of Dhup Singh .............................................................................. 181 Ajit son of Dalip (A-32), Manbir son of Jile Singh (A-59), Balwan Singh son of Jeela (A-47), Pawan son of Rajbir (A-69), Dalbir son of Tara Chand (A-50), Kuldeep son of Om Prakash (A-57) ...................................................................................................... 182 Respondents represented by Mr. M.L. Yadav ............................................................................. 183 A-87: Vikas son of Sunehra @ Sumer Singh .............................................................. 183 A-80: Satyawan son of Rajender ................................................................................. 185 A-2: Pawan son of Ram Mehar .................................................................................... 185 A-40: Amit son of Satyawan........................................................................................ 186 A-14: Deepak @ Sonu son of Krishan @ Pappu......................................................... 187 A-6: Balwan son of Inder Singh .................................................................................. 188 Pradeep son of Ramphal (A-28) and Vedpal son of Dayanand (A-98) ...................... 188 Respondents represented by Mr. R.P. Luthra .............................................................................. 188 A-21: Daya Singh son of Jeet Singh ............................................................................ 189 A-4: Rajbir @ Nanhe son of Mai Chand ..................................................................... 190 Rupesh son of Tek Chand (A-93) and Satyawan son of Tara Chand (A-7) ............... 190 Respondents represented by Mr. Jitender Sethi ........................................................................... 191 Summary of findings .................................................................................................................... 191 Sentences awarded ....................................................................................................................... 197 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 199 Epilogue........................................................................................................................................ 206 Introduction

Applicability of the POA Act

111. The accused persons in the present case were also charged with having committed offences punishable under the POA Act. The said legislation has been enacted with the purpose of protecting members of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities from caste-based atrocities perpetrated against them. Article 341 of the Constitution of India empowers the President to specify, with respect to any State, after consultation with the Governor of that State, by public notification, the castes, races, or tribes which shall be deemed to be Scheduled Castes in relation to that State. In pursuance of this power, the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 was promulgated which specified in its Schedule the deemed Scheduled Castes with respect to each State. Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976 introduced an altogether new Schedule to replace the earlier one wherein the Scheduled Castes in the State of Haryana were also listed in Part V. The Balmiki caste is listed under Entry No.2 of Part V as a Scheduled Caste. Therefore, it is beyond contention that offences committed against members of the Balmiki community would attract the provisions of the POA Act.

112. The charges under the POA Act in the present case were under clauses (x) and (xv) of Section 3(1) POA Act and clauses (iii), (iv), and (v) of Section 3(2) POA Act. The relevant clauses, as they stood at the time of the incident and prior to amendment, read as under:

"3. (1) Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe,--
xxxxx
(x) intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view;

124. Furthermore, as has been rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the complainants, this issue about the POA Act not being applicable was never raised at any stage before the trial Court. Not only was the FIR in this case registered for offences punishable under the POA Act read with provisions of the IPC, the charge sheet itself contained references to the POA Act. The trial has been conducted in a Special Court designated to hear cases under the POA Act. In fact, the trial was transferred to the Special Court on the directions of the Supreme Court as noted hereinbefore. The charges framed against the accused included those under the POA Act and this was again not challenged by any of the accused.