Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

REVN-430-2017-J.doc

(j) According to the prosecution case reflected from the CBI statement of PW105 Nathuba Jadeja, thereafter, Kausarbi also came to be murdered by the accused persons and her dead body came to be disposed off by burning it at the bed of the river at Village Ellol. PW105 Nathuba Jadeja was asked by discharged accused no.1 D.G.Vanzara, Deputy Inspector General, to accompany the tempo along with Police Official Chauhan. Firewood came to be loaded in that tempo and during the journey to Village Ellol, that tempo faced problem of malfunctioning of gear. Another tempo was summoned and firewood came to be shifted in that tempo. Further journey started thereafter and at about 10.00 to 11.00 p.m. of 28th November 2005, that tempo also got stuck in the sand in the bed of the river at Village Ellol. Then, discharged accused no.1 D.G.Vanzara, discharged accused no.2 Rajkumar Pandiyan and discharged accused N.K.Amin came there. Firewood from the tempo came to be stacked near the river bed. Dead body of Kausarbi was brought there by a jeep. As stated by PW105 Nathuba REVN-430-2017-J.doc Jadeja, it was kept on the funeral pyre by him as well as by Chauhan, Chaubey and Rathod. Accused no.1 D.G.Vanzara, Deputy Inspector General, burnt it by setting the pyre on fire. Thereafter, ashes and bones came to be collected in a bag and by the jeep, that bag was carried away by Police Officials named Chaubey and Chauhan.

55 So far as Call Data Records (CDRs) of co-accused Vanzara reflecting calls between him and respondent/discharged accused no.3 Dinesh M.N. are concerned, telephonic communication between two senior police officers of two different States by themselves does not reflect any conspiracy. Contents of those telephonic calls are not with the prosecuting agency. Without any material as regards the conversation between discharged accused no.1 D.G.Vanzara, Deputy Inspector General, Anti Terrorist Squad, Ahmedabad, and respondent/discharged accused no.3 Dinesh M.N., merely on the basis of CDR of D.G.Vanzara, Deputy Inspector General, it cannot be inferred that sufficient ground is made out for framing the Charge. Proper course of action would have been to obtain CDR of respondent/ discharged accused no.3 Dinesh M.N. for giving clear picture.

58 It was urged that once discharged accused no.1 D.G.Vanzara, Deputy Inspector General, Anti Terrorist Squad, Ahmedabad, visited Udaipur and respondent/discharged accused REVN-430-2017-J.doc no.3 Dinesh M.N. made arrangements for his stay and this fact reflects conspiracy to kill Sohrabuddin Shaikh and Tulsiram Prajapati. For this purpose, reliance is placed on statement of PW11 Suresh Mehta and PW12 Phulchand which shows that during 27th December 2005 to 30th December 2005, discharged accused no.1 D.G.Vanzara, Deputy Inspector General, Anti Terrorist Squad, Ahmedabad, visited Circuit House, Udaipur, and that room was booked at the instance of respondent/discharged accused no.3 Dinesh M.N. Infact, this visit was after one month of encounter of Sohrabuddin Shaikh. Discharged accused no.1 D.G.Vanzara was the Deputy Inspector General of Police of Anti Terrorist Squad, Ahmedabad. Extending protocol courtesy by reserving room in the name of D.G.Vanzara cannot be termed as an objectionable act raising suspicion. Ultimately, the said visit was official visit and the stay was documented in the Circuit House by official booking. It was not clandestine visit and the stay was not at some secret place or private hotel.

REVN-430-2017-J.doc 87 Now let us consider whether recitals of what was allegedly stated to them by Tulsiram Prajapati documented in the statements made by prisoners to the Investigating Officer at Central Jail, Udaipur, constitute dying declarations of Tulsiram Prajapati, and therefore, forms sufficient ground for framing Charge against respondent/discharged accused no.3 Dinesh M.N. For this purpose, reliance is placed on statement of co-prisoners PW Dinesh Gujjar, PW42 Rafique @ Bunty, PW Mohd.Azam and PW37 Sharafat Ali apart from that of PW3 Kundan Prajapati - nephew of Tulsiram Prajapati as well as PW4 Vimal Shrivas - friend of PW3 Kundan Prajapati. Statement of PW35 Advocate Salim Khan representing Tulsiram Prajapati in Hamid Lala murder case is also relied by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner. PW Dinesh Gujjar in his statement dated 27 th June 2011 has stated to CBI about recitals of Tulsiram Prajapati to him during their stay at Udaipur Jail. He stated that Tulsiram Prajapati used to abuse Gujarat police and respondent/discharged accused no.3 Dinesh M.N. and used to declare that he will kill respondent/discharged accused no.3 Dinesh M.N. because his REVN-430-2017-J.doc brother and sister-in-law are killed by him. PW Dinesh Gujjar further stated that on request of Tulsiram Prajapati, he wrote applications in English on his behalf to the courts and senior civil officers. As per statement of this witness, application of Tulsiram Prajapati addressed to the National Human Rights Commission was drafted by him. He stated that in the last week of November 2006, Tulsiram Prajapati had informed him that this time police had sent extra force with them and the in-charge of the escorting party gave indication to Tulsiram Prajapati by saying that " vc rsjk uacj gS". Therefore, Tulsiram Prajapati called his nephew PW3 Kundan Prajapati and another boy PW4 Vimal Shrivas from Ujjain. On 25th December 2006, Tulsiram Prajapati was reluctant to go to Ahmedabad but police took him forcibly. Before leaving Tulsiram Prajapati told him that this could be his last meeting. This witness further stated that Tulsiram Prajapati and Mohd.Azam had informed him on earlier occasions that they had requested the court to sent them back by chaining their legs so that police may not claim that they had escaped. PW42 Rafique @ Bunty in his statement to the CBI has stated that Tulsiram Prajapati disclosed REVN-430-2017-J.doc to him that police arrested his nephew PW3 Kundan Prajapati and PW4 Vimal Shrivas. He further stated that when Police Inspector Abdul Rehman met Tulsiram Prajapati in the jail, Tulsiram Prajapati uttered that if something happens to his nephew, he will not spare respondent/discharged accused no.3 Dinesh M.N., D.G.Vanzara, Churasama, so also Police Inspector Abdul Rehman. 88 PW Mohd.Azam Khan in his statement dated 14 th November 2011 has confessed about his criminal activities in association with Tulsiram Prajapati and Sohrabuddin Shaikh, incident of firing at the office of the Popular Builder at Ahmedabad, about activities of extortion carried out by the gang of Sohrabuddin Shaikh and Tulsiram Prajapati. He has also spoken about meeting of Tulsiram Prajapati with discharged accused no.1 D.G.Vanzara. As per version of PW Mohd. Azam, on 28th November 2006, about 30 to 40 police personnels were accompanying them to Ahmedabad, and at Ahmedabad they shouted in the court that police might kill them. He stated that he himself and Tulsiram Prajapati had applied for security. He stated REVN-430-2017-J.doc that on 26th December 2006, Tulsiram Prajapati hugged him and told him that it might be their last meeting and the police might encounter him. PW37 Sharafat Ali in his statement had disclosed that Tulsiram Prajapati was openly saying that he himself will kill D.G.Vanzara, Deputy Inspector General, Anti Terrorist Squad, Ahmedabad, and respondent/discharged accused no.3 Dinesh M.N. so also was apprehending danger to his life at the hands of police. In first week of December 2006, Police Inspector Abdul Rehman told him that he will receive news of encounter of Tulsiram Prajapati shortly.