Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. It is prosecution version that on 12.9.1992 at about 03:20 hours and incident of shoot out took place in J.J. Hospital Campus at Mumbai, which is a Government Hospital having occupancy of 1500 beds. It is alleged that having made preparation, such as procuring sophisticated weapons like AK-17 rifles, pistols, revolvers, dynamites and hand-grenades and by firing the shots through the said weapons, accused have committed murder of (1) Prisoner Shailesh Shankar Haldankar, who was undergoing treatment in Ward No.18 in the said hospital; (2) Police Head Constable Chaintaman Gajanan Javsen; and (3) Police Constable Kawalsingh Baddu Bhanawat. The two policemen were on guard duty of prisoner Shailesh Shankar Haldankar. It is also alleged that they attempted to commit murder of six other persons including PW11 Shankar Ganapat Sawant - a patient undergoing treatment in ward no.18, Yunus Mohamed Dadarkar - a relative of a patient, PW54 Shankar Ramchandra Jadhav - watchman on duty, PW9 Constable on guard duty, Vijay Krishna Nagare, PW42 PSI Thakur, the Police Officer on duty to exercise the supervision over the guard and a staff nurse Smt. Chandrakala Vithal Vinde, who was on duty. Thus, it is alleged that all the accused have committed the offence punishable under Sections 120B of IPC read with 3(2)(i), 3(2)(ii), 3(3), 3(4), 5 and 6 of Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the 'TADA') and Section 302 read with section 34 in the alternative section 302 read with section 114, in the alternative read with Sections 149, 307 read with section 34, in the alternative section 307 read with section 114 in the alternative section 307 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 read with section 5 of the Arms Act.

42. Learned counsel further referred tot he decision in State vs. Nalini and others . This judgment also does not in any way support their contentions. A three-Judge Bench of this Court quoted the dictum laid down in Hitendra Vishnu Thakur vs. State of Maharashtra and others with approval and concluded thus (Para 51 p.298):-

"The legal position remains unaltered that the crucial postulate for judging whether the offence is a terrorist act falling under TADA or not is whether it was done with the intent to overawe the Government as by law established or to strike terror in the people etc."