9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 1230X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble under Section 120B read with Sections 302, 364, 365, 368, 193, 197, 342, 420, 384, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'the IPC') and Sections 25(1B)(a) and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and he was arrested on 24.04.2007 and since then is in custody. 4) The other appellant - Balkrishan Rajendraprasad Chaubey (Accused No. 6), who was working as a subInspector of Police in the Anti Terrorist Squad (ATS), Ahmedabad, at the relevant time, is also one of the accused persons in the same case arising out of R.C. No. BS1/S/2010/0004 dated 01.02.2010 registered with the CBI SCB, Mumbai and was charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Section 120B read with Sections 365, 368, 302 and 201 of the IPC and he was arrested on 01.07.2007 and since then is in custody. 5) Inasmuch as we are concerned only with the grant of bail pending trial, there is no need to analyse all the factual details except their involvement in the commission of offence, as alleged by the prosecution. In the cases on hand, as per the prosecution story, three murders were allegedly committed inter alia by senior police officers like the appellants - Sanghian Pandian Rajkumar (A-2) and Balkrishan Raj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ira Jaising, learned Additional Solicitor General, by taking us through the relevant materials referred to in the charge-sheet and presented in the court, submitted that inasmuch as both the appellants were police officers, there is every likelihood of influencing the witnesses. Learned ASG also submitted that inasmuch as there is a direct link in the abduction and killing of Sohrabuddin, Kausarbi and Tulsiram Prajapati, no case is made out for grant of bail at this juncture. She further submitted that by transfer of case records from the trial court as well as from the High Court of Gujarat to the transferee Court at Mumbai, viz., the Special Court, CBI and after translation of the same, the trial is likely to be concluded within a reasonable time. She also pointed out that the grant of bail/anticipatory bail to certain other accused is not a ground for release of these appellants at this stage. Accordingly, she prayed for dismissal of both the appeals. 10) We have considered the rival contentions and perused all the relevant materials including the charges levelled against the appellants. Discussion: 11) Before considering the claim of the parties and materials relied upon fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, it cannot be claimed that the investigating agency was responsible for the delay. 14) Mr. U.U. Lalit, learned senior counsel for Sanghian Pandian Rajkumar (A-2) asserted that not even a single person implicated him in the commission of offences as alleged by the prosecution. On going through the allegations pertaining to A-2 in the charge-sheet and the arguments of Mr. Lalit, learned senior counsel as well as Ms. Indira Jaising, learned ASG, we are not inclined to express any specific opinion at this stage. However, there is no dispute that A-2 was arrested on 24.04.2007 and A-6 was arrested on 01.07.2007 and both of them are in custody since then. In other words, they are in custody nearly for a period of seven years pending trial. Though the prosecution has filed the charges, admittedly, so far, the same have not been framed by the Court. Both the counsel for the appellants pointed out that there is no chance of completion of trial in the near future due to voluminous documents and more than 600 witnesses. We have already pointed out that the charges have not been framed even after seven years. Per contra, Learned ASG submitted that inasmuch as both the appellants are police ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . (c) Vimal Pattani (accused No. 20) by Special Judge, CBI, Greater Mumbai (Sessions) on 05/07/2013 in Anticipatory bail Application No. 773/2013. (d) Gulabchand H. Kataria (accused No. 21), by Special Judge, CBI, Greater Mumbai (Sessions) on 05/07/2013 in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 788/2013. (e) Narasinhulu Balasubramaniam (accused No. 22) by Special Judge, CBI, Greater Mumbai (Sessions), on 05/07/2013 in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 781/2013. (f) Ghattamaneni Srinivasa Rao (accused No. 23), by Special Judge, CBI, Greater Mumbai, on 05/07/2013, in Anticipatory bail Application No. 781/2013." 16) A perusal of the reason(s) for grant of bail or anticipatory bail shows that some of the accused were granted bail by the trial court and some by the High Court and by this Court. Apart from pointing out various orders, learned counsel for the appellants has brought to our notice the order passed by this Court in Naresh Vishnu Chauhan vs. State of Gujarat & Anr. in SLP (Crl.) No. 1627 of 2011 wherein Naresh Vishnu Chauhan, who was one of the coaccused, at the relevant time posted as sub-Inspector of Police and was attached to the Anti-Terrorist Squad, Ahmedabad. In spi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pertaining to these cases which are lying in the original Court at Gujarat as well as the records relating to the same under the custody of the High Court of Gujarat, if any, be transferred to the Special Court, CBI, Mumbai within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. After receipt of all the required materials, the Special Court, CBI at Mumbai have to get the relevant documents alone translated within a period of three months thereafter. The Special Court, CBI at Mumbai is directed to take the assistance of the Registrars of the High Courts of Bombay and Gujarat for completion of the translation work as fixed. By this order, we also direct the Registrars of the Bombay and Gujarat High Courts to render all assistance to the Special Judge, CBI Mumbai for early completion of the translation work within the time stipulated by this Court. After receipt of the required material and completion of translation work, we direct the special Judge to take all endeavor for early completion of the trial. 24) In the light of what is stated above, we are satisfied that both the appellants have made out a case for bail on executing a bond with two solvent sureties, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
