LAWS(CHH)-2006-3-14

AVINASH SINGH Vs. STATE OF CHHATTIS GARH

Decided On March 20, 2006
AVINASH SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Invoking inherent jurisdiction under Section 482, Cr.P.C. the two accused persons of S.T. No. 334/2003 (State v. Vinod Singh @ Badal and 4 others) have called in question the legality of the order dated 17/11/2005 passed in S. T. No. 329/2005 (State through C.B.I, v. Amit Jogi and 30 others) whereby the two Sessions Trials having diametrically opposite versions have been directed to be consolidated by the 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Raipur (C.G.).

(2.) The brief facts are that one Ram Avtar Jaggi, a leader of National Congress party was shot at 11.40 p.m. on 4/6/2003 and in this connection, a First Information Report was lodged in P. S. Moudhapara, Raipur vide F.I.R. No. 104/2003 for the offences under Sections 447 and 307, I.P.C. This F.I.R. was lodged at the instance of V.K. Pandey, the Station House Officer, P.S. Moudhapara Raipur. Ram Avtar Jaggi was then sent to Macahara Hospital, Raipur, where he died. On 5/6/2003, at 2.15 a.m. another report vide F.I.R. No. 105/2003 was again registered for the same incident under Section 302, I.P.C. on the instance of one Satish Jaggi, son of the deceased. Thereafter, five accused persons namely Vinod Singh, Avinash Singh, Jamwant Kashyap, Shyam Sunder and Vishwanath Rajbhar were arrested in connection with Crime No. 104/2003 by the State Police and a charge-sheet was filed against them before the concerned Court. Later on, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and the learned Sessions Judge, Raipur, made over this case to the Court of 9th Addl. Sessions Judge, Raipur on 15-10-2003 for its lawful disposal. This was ultimately registered as S. T. No. 334/2003. It appears that during the course of trial, an application u/S. 173'8), Cr.P.C. was moved by the Addl. Public Prosecutor for allowing a further investigation in the said case. This application was allowed and further investigation was permitted. Thereafter, on the instance of the State Government, this matter was handed over to the C.B.I, for further investigation and C.B.I. then registered Crime No. R.C-1/S/2004, dated 22-1-2004 under Sections 120-B, 302 & 427, I.P.C. and Section 25/27 of the Arms Act. It is stated that though the further investigation was permitted but the proceedings of the Sessions Trial No. 334/2003 pending in the Court of 9th A.S.J., Raipur was not stayed and ultimately out of 21 cited prosecution witnesses, 18 were examined in the aforesaid trial. However, by that time, the investigation permitted was complete and the C.B.I, filed another charge-sheet against 31 persons, including the 5 accused persons of S.T. No. 334/2003, under Sections 120-B, 302, 427 & 201/34, I.P.C. and Section 25/27 of the Arms Act. This case was also committed to the Court of sessions on 8-9-2005. The learned Sessions Judge, Raipur, after committal, made over this case for trial to the Court of 3rd A.S.J., Raipur, (different Court than the earlier Court) which was ultimately registered as S.T. No. 329/2005.

(3.) It is very important to mention that in the Sessions Trial No. 334/2003, in which the charge-sheet was filed by the State Police, the prosecution case is that these petitioners and three other co-accused persons committed murder of deceased Ram Avtar Jaggi and the motive for the murder is said to be the robbery. Whereas in the sub-sequent Sessions Trial No. 329/2005, in which the charge-sheet was filed by the C.B.I, the prosecution case is that the deceased Ram Avtar Jaggi was shot dead by accused Chiman Singh for political reasons as a rally was organized by the National Congress Party in Raipur on 10-6-2003 by Ram Avtar Jaggi and it was reported that lakhs of people are gathering in the said rally at Raipur and this posed a political threat to the then Chief Minister Shri Ajit Jogi and his son Amit Jogi and the murder was committed after a criminal conspiracy hatched between Chiman Singh, Amit Jogi and other co-accused persons. As stated by learned counsel for the petitioners, it is alleged in the sub-sequent charge-sheet that the present petitioners and other three co-accused persons in S.T. No. 334/2003 had not committed the murder of Ram Avtar Jaggi and were made to make false confessions in this regard so that they are prosecuted and the actual culprits including the conspirators may be saved who were in fact responsible for the murder of the deceased which was committed for political gains.