- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and with the assistance perused the material placed during arguments.
(2.) AS it reveals from the charge-sheet that for the alleged incident on the fateful day of 17.03.2011 the case was initially registered by Rajasthan Police as Crime/FIR-108/2011 in Man- Town Police Station Sawaimadhopur on 17.05.2011 on a complaint made by Sh. Mahendra Singh (accused) the then Circle Officer-City, Sawaimadhopur against 21 named persons accused and 1200 unknown persons accused. However, the aforesaid case was transferred to CID-CB Rajasthan for investigation by Government of Rajasthan and the CID-CB on conclusion of initial phase of investigation filed charge-sheet against 19 accused persons for offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 109, 114, 120-B, 302, 307, 440, 332, 333, 353, 427, 335 and 201 IPC and sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sawaimadhopur on 21.06.2012 and further investigation against other known accused persons who were absconding and other accused whose identities was yet to be ascertained and established was kept pending U/s 173(8) Cr.P.C. However, during this time in compliance of directions pursuant to notification dt.10.06.2011 issued by Government of India in terms of Sec.5 of Delhi Special Police Establishment Act,1946 in furtherance of the request contained under notification dt.22.03.2011 of Government of Rajasthan, FIR-108/2011 registered at Police Station Man-Town, Sawaimadhopur was transferred to CBI for investigation U/s 6 of Delhi Special Police Establishment Act,1946 and it was re-registered as FIR-108/2011 of Man-Town Police Station, Sawaimadhopur as RC1(S)/2011/SCIII/CBI on 30.06.2011 and then it took up the case for further investigation. The investigation as alleged being held pursuant to FIR, referred to supra, has disclosed regarding riots and violence which culminated into heinous murder of decedent Phool Mohammad Khan, Inspector of Police, Senior Erstwhile colleague of one of the accused Sumer Singh-Sub-Inspector and Senior Officer Mahendra Singh Tanwar-Circle Inspector while discharging his lawful duties within his own jurisdiction Soorwal village on that fateful day of 17.05.2011. As it reveals from the record that on 25.02.2011 one Smt. Dhaka Devi was found brutally murdered in the agricultural fields and there was suspicion on one Shamsher Khan, a local ruffian in Soorval village and agitation of the local community people of Mali and Meena in Soorval village to arrest the culprit and in this communal charged up situation in the village two students namely Rajesh Meena of Badolas and Banwari Lal Meena of Batod had come to Soorval village on 15.03.2011 for the purpose of agitating the murder of Smt. Dhaka Devi and they started agitation on 16.03.2011 as alleged about afternoon on coming to become aware that the students duo were also distributing pamphlets amongst public and were proposing to carry out the agitation in Soorval village on account of failure of police to solve the murder case of Smt. Dhaka Devi and on the fateful day of 17.03.2011, the student duo climbed on the water tank in village Soorval with bottles of petrol and issued an ultimatum to the government authorities in District Sawaimadhopur (i) to arrest and handover the murderers of Smt. Dhaka Devi to them (ii) to provide compensation of Rs.10 lacs to the family of Smt. Dhaka Devi and (iii) this should be done before 1700 hours or else they would immolate themselves from the tank and jump down. At that point of time agitating villagers were gathering and were being cordoned off by a team of policemen without any officers and upon hearing the screaking screams while falling down after having accidentally caught fire at around 1705 hours the agitating villagers became out of control and at that point of time the accused police officers namely Sumer Singh and Mahendra Singh surreptitiously and hurriedly left Soorval village and as alleged from the testimonies of the eye-witnesses on the spot and the audio visual footage captured by the police photographer and other media personnel available at the spot at that time has facilitated the commission of riotous violence. There was allegation against accused police officers that no efforts were made to maintain peace and prevent disturbances to law and order with criminal force and show of criminal force intentionally committed joint riotous acts including all manners of unlawful criminal forceful physical violence and hurt to the human body. The decedent police officer Phool Mohammad Khan was present in an unconscious state after having been hit on his head sometime earlier by a strong flung at him by the agitators and in the process of the joint commission of such unlawful violence they could have prevented the public servants including policemen and medical auxiliaries from rescuing Rajesh Meena who had fallen down and after having left the decedent Phool Mohammad Khan to face the wrath of the villagers at his own but no preventive measures were adopted by the accused police officers and sensing their collusive act of intentional material omission facilitated the commission of heinous offences and led a small force of policemen inside the village at around 1745 hours and no efforts were made to disseminate the unlawful assembly and that led to put to fire in the vehicle in which the decedent Phool Mohammad Khan was burnt and his body was taken for medico-legal and other customary formalities thereafter. There is allegation that subsequently the accused police officers had drafted the FIR by framing records that they knew to be incorrect by making it appear as if they were present at the scene of crime and had seen certain supposed accused persons including those who did not participate in any act of riotous violence as responsible for the rioting and had also deliberately put the wrong timing of commencement of incident 1705 so that it can be aligned with the telephonic calls with the accused police officers with the then Superintendent of Police and allow them to conceal their collusive role in the whole matter and save themselves from the consequences of accounting them before the law of land and in the senseless violence perpetrated by the unlawful assembly on the fateful day apart from certain constables sustained injuries there was also arson to public property. At the same time apart from accused police officers there is further allegation against other accused persons Prithvi Raj Meena, Satyanarayan Meena, Pukhraj Meena, Sher Singh Meena and Shyamlal Mali, Pappu @ Ram Charan and Sheo Karan @ Shiv Karan who were not merely present at the scene of crime on the fateful day of 17.03.2011 but they were also active members of the unlawful assembly of persons who committed all manners of riotous violence against the public servants including 116 policemen discharging their official duties and had been specifically seen by PW40 and PW191 pelting stones on the public servants and on the strength of unlawful assembly committed heinous crime and shows the scant regard that the accused petitioners has for servants of the law performing their lawful duties and was actively involved in the commission of such riotous violence which subsequently gave rise to the events that led to the burning of decedent by accused persons. There was further allegation against other accused petitioners that by burning the decedent and a witness had called out to those in the unlawful assembly to help put out the flames and extricate his partly burning body from the burning vehicle, none from such unlawful assembly including the accused petitioner has come forward and through such deliberate act of intentional material omission had contributed to the murder of the public servant who was being burnt while he was lying helpless and unconscious from the injuries sustained from previous intentional injuries inflicted on him by the other accused members of unlawful assembly as aforesaid. There is further allegation against Satyanarayan Meena that he had purchased petrol for Rjaesh Meena and Banwari Lal Meena, who took the said petrol to the water tank and issued ultimatums, referred to supra, which was subsequently used by deceased Rajesh Meena for pouring over himself, just afterwards caught fire and fell down from the water tank. Further investigation discloses that 17 arrested accused persons were questioned by the CBI in judicial custody with the permission of Additional District Judge, SC/ST Cases, Sawaimadhopur and after accused volunteered to undertake polygraph test, it was administered to them by a team of forensic scientists from the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, New Delhi and it further revealed that accused Sher Singh Meena brought the fuel and burned the vehicles. Accused Shyam Lal Mali burned the second jeep. It has also come in the charge-sheet that accused Prithvi Raj Meena bore ill will towards the deceased Phool Mohammad and was an active member of unlawful assembly and prevented police officers from performing their duties due to which Rajesh could not be taken to hospital. Against accused Satya Narayan Meena, there is allegation that he abetted the murder of Rajesh as he purchased petrol which the duo carried to the water tank and was an active member of unlawful assembly. Against accused Pukhraj Meena, Sher Singh Meena, Pappu @ Ram Charan and Sheo Karan @ Shiv Karan there is allegation that they were active members of unlawful assembly and pelted stones on public servants on duty and damaged the pubic property. Finally charge-sheet came to be filed for offence U/s 119/36 and 218 IPC and sections 147, 148, 149, 152, 332, 427, 440, 435, 307, 304(A), 109, 114 and section 201 IPC and sections 3 and 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act,1984. Against two accused police officers Sumer Singh and Mahendra Singh and 86 accused persons including accused petitioners on 16.12.2011 and out of 86 accused persons, 19 could be arrested and out of two accused police officers accused Mahendra Singh and others are still absconding and against such accused persons charge-sheet has been filed U/s 299 Cr.P.C. and against other suspected persons to ascertain whether they are at all part of criminal communal conspiracy it is pending investigation U/s 173 (8) Cr.P.C. It was further informed to the Court that for framing of charge the case is fixed before the learned trial court on 31.07.2012. Having heard the counsel appearing for respective parties and taking note of the seriousness of the allegations and the fact that large number of accused persons are still absconding but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is not inclined to grant indulgence of post-arrest bail to the accused petitioners U/s 439 Cr.P.C. Consequently, the bail applications stand rejected.;