Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(b) The order passed by the Supreme Court in the special leave petition filed by the prosecution challenging this court's order granting bail to A-55 is important. The criticism levelled by the accused that the CBI had collected evidence against A-55 belatedly was rejected by the Supreme Court by observing that because of the unsatisfactory performance of State police and the number of police personnel involved in the alleged crime, CBI was directed to take up the investigation in March, 2004. The Supreme Court also observed that the same will be the case with regard to confessional statement of A-8 and it cannot be discarded on the basis that it was belated. These observations of the AJN Supreme Court though made at an interim stage are vital and would be very relevant even at the stage of discharge application. In the circumstances, this court should set aside the impugned order and direct the trial court to try A-55 in accordance with law.

Therefore the evidence of witnesses who are accomplices needs to be discarded. In the circumstances, this is a fit case where the order of discharge needs to be confirmed.

24. Before dealing with the rival submissions, what needs to be kept in mind is the enormity of the scam of bogus stamps and stamp papers. Forty three accused have pleaded guilty to the charge framed against them and they are convicted. These 43 include main accused AJN A-23 AKL Telgi. He has been convicted. A very important feature of this case is the alleged involvement of high ranking officers of the police department. This case was transferred by the Supreme Court to CBI. In this connection, reference must be made to the observations made by the Supreme Court in the order passed by it on the special leave petition filed by CBI challenging this court's order granting bail to A-55. It was urged by counsel for A-55 that the Supreme Court's order is merely an interim order and, hence, it's observations should not weigh with this court. But, even if I keep the Supreme Court's observations that this court was not right in trying to discard the evidence gathered by the CBI as evidence gathered belatedly, out of consideration the Supreme Court's observation that CBI was directed to take up the investigation in March, 2004 and what the Supreme Court intended by that order was to get a thorough investigation done by the CBI, especially in the nature of unsatisfactory performance of the State Police and the large number of police officers and higher ups allegedly involved in the AJN organized crime is very relevant. This is the reason given by the Supreme Court why the investigation was transferred and that will always have to be kept in mind.

The performance of the State police was described as unsatisfactory. Its unsatisfactory performance could be due to the involvement of its high ranking police officers in the scam. This possibility cannot be ruled out.

Therefore, if there are any inadequacies or shortcomings in the investigation prior to the CBI taking over the investigation, they will have to be viewed against the above peculiar background of this case. For the purpose of ascertaining A-55's involvement, this background becomes important.

Therefore, even if for a moment the alleged role of A-55 in this case is kept out of consideration, prima facie knowledge of C.R. No.78 of 1998 and involvement of A-23 AKL Telgi therein can be imputed to A-55. The main contention of A-55 is that these statements are recorded after considerable delay and are of doubtful veracity. In my opinion, these statements cannot be ignored because of delay in their recording. The connivance, aiding and AJN abetting by the police force is stated to be a glaring feature of this case. It merits emphasis that C.R. No.78 of 1998 was being investigated by A-44 PI Kamat who has played major role in this case and he and A-55 were working in close association as officers of the Crime Branch. I have already reproduced the Supreme Court's observation while dealing with the special leave petition filed against the order of this court granting bail to A-55 that investigation was transferred to the CBI due to unsatisfactory performance of the police force and because number of police personnel and higher ups were involved in the organized crime. It is possible that in the earlier statements A-55's role is not highlighted because of the shoddy investigation which had to be transferred by the Supreme Court to the CBI. It is also possible that though A-55's role had come to the forefront, it was taken serious note of when investigation changed hands. In my opinion, in a case of this magnitude, in the peculiar circumstances of the case A-55 cannot be discharged on the ground of delay in recording statements. In fact, in AJN my opinion, prima facie there is enough material indicating involvement of A-55 and it is necessary to test the veracity of all the witnesses in the trial to find out whether there was any attempt by the police to protect its own officers. At this stage, I am not inclined to accept the argument that these statements are concocted and recorded to oppose A-55's bail application because there was no evidence.