Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. This application for cancellation of bail has genesis in FIR being CR No. I 5 of 2005 filed by one Abdul Rehman, a Police Officer, subordinate to the respondent and now an accused, who was a member of the Special Investigating Party formed at Udaipur, Rajasthan to investigate into various offences registered against one Sohrabuddin. As per the above FIR, one Sohrabuddin, son of Anwaruddin Shaikh, resident of Zaraniya, Nagda, Madhya Pradesh, who was accused of offences punishable under Sections 120(b), 121, 121A, 122, 123, 307, 186, 224 of the Indian Penal Code, under Sections 25(1)(b) and Section 27A of the Arms Act and under Section 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act. In the above FIR it is alleged that the above accused (Sohrabuddin) was acting at the behest of ISI to spread the terror and to disturb the unity and integrity of the country and also entered into conspiracy by possessing arms and ammunition so as to kill one of the big leaders of the State of Gujarat and when asked to surrender by the police party, fired from his revolver and attempted to kill them.

4. Later on, Rubabuddin Shaikh, brother of Sohrabuddin, filed petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, which was registered as Writ Petition (Cri.) No. 6 of 2007. Pursuant to the directions issued from time to time, the Investigating Agency of the State of Gujarat has carried out investigation and it was found by the Investigating Agency that death of Sohrabuddin and subsequently reported death of Kausarbi, wife of Sohrabuddin, was a result of a fake encounter carried out by the then officers of the Anti-Terrorist Squad (for short 'ATS'), State of Gujarat and senior IPS officers of State of Gujarat and State of Rajasthan are involved in the fake encounter. All those officers were arrested and respondent-accused No. 3 is one of such senior IPS officer belonging to the State of Rajasthan.

9. Shri A.Y. Kogje, learned APP, appearing for applicant-State of Gujarat submits that role of the respondent surfaced when Sohrabuddin, a wanted accused, involved in an offence registered with Hathipole Police Station, Udaipur, which was under his jurisdiction. The respondent contacted Ahmedabad Police to trace out Sohrabuddin. When Sohrabuddin was apprehended, information was given to the respondent and therefore, respondent herein informed his superior officers to send a team to Ahmedabad. The respondent herein was the leader of that team and before any formal order could be passed forming a team, the weapons were procured from the Kotwali. Upon his arrival in Ahmedabad, he had coordinated and participated in the fake encounter along with ATS officers of State of Gujarat. Thus, according to learned APP, it is a clear case of well thought conspiracy attracting ingredients of Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

e. Retraction of the statement of Shri Nathubha or any other statement by any other person is to be considered at the stage of Trial as laid down by the apex court in case of State Through C.B.I. v. Amarmani Tripathi .
f. Irrelevant comparison about lodgment of 25 FIRs for various serious offences against Sohrabuddin and meritorious service of the respondent-Officer by the learned Judge amounts to extraneous consideration.
g. Ignoring other material about statement of Shri Gurdayal Singh, driver of ATS recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code since in fact Sohrabuddin was illegally apprehended at Tindola in Karnataka by ATS team and brought to Ahmedabad. The above fact is corroborated by other witnesses also, including bus driver, conductor and other passengers and also about illegal detention of Sohrabuddin at some private farm in Ahmedabad.