JUDGEMENT
D.N.PATEL,J. -
(1.) WE have heard counsel for both the sides. Looking to the findings of the court below and the F.I.R. and also looking to the evidences on record and the manner in which the whole case is conducted right from the stage of investigation, it appears that there are several lacunas in the investigation. Several eye witnesses, though have given statements during investigation, have not been cited as prosecution witnesses in the charge sheet. Similarly, several items, which were seized from the scene of occurrence of five murders, have not been produced before the trial court and several other items, which were produced before the trial court, were never seized. Moreover, some documents have also been presented by the prosecution, after recording of statements under Section 313 of the accused.
(2.) THE trial court has also observed in paragraph nos. 2 and 35 of the judgment of the trial court, which read as under:
"2. At the very outset, it is made clear that this is a case in which, the Police was hand in gloves with the accused and therefore, every effort was made by the Police to save the accused at any cost. The entire investigation was conducted in such a manner which is unparallel in the field of criminal investigation. Even the supervising authorities never cared to direct investigation towards proper direction as per the settled procedure laid down under the Code of Criminal Procedure and by various decisions of the Apex Court. No steps were taken to rectify the mistakes committed by the consecutive Investigating Offices except suspending them one after another. 35. As already discussed above, it is clear from the manner of investigation done by the respective Investigating Officers and I have no hesitation to state that they had tried their level best to protect the culprit by not recording the F.I.R. properly, introducing three witnesses who were the men of the accused, two of them were of his village home Bhalber in the district of Dhanbad and one witness was his own brotherinlaw. Further, manipulations were done in the seizure list by adding the word "blood stain" in the black Purse of the accused recovered from the scene of crime, by recording the statement of eye witness after more than 36 hours of the occurrence. They did not follow the settled Rules of seizure of Material Exts. by not taking signature of the seizure witness on each Material Exts and by not sealing the seized Material Exts. in a properly covered box. They changed the Material Exts. (cheque of Allahabad Bank and coins) recovered from the Purse of the accused. They did not care to send the Material Exts. or any blood from the place of occurrence for examination in the Forensic Science Laboratory. Even the Senior Police Officers supervising the case, did not take any care to properly supervise the case and see that all procedures were followed during investigation. Therefore, the Senior Police Officers can not escape the liability of ignoring the ghastly murders of five innocent persons i.e. the entire family members of R.P . Mishra in the heart of Bokaro Steel City. Therefore, Inspector Javed Mahmood, SI M.R. Bhargav and SI Niraj Pathak (all investigating Officers of the case) should be immediately dismissed from Police Service for their active connivance with the accused. Sooner they are are removed, better for the Police Administration. SI Daroga Singh is faciing prosecution in connection with disappearance of the Material Exts. from the Malkhana and in the same manner, all the aforesaid Police Officers shlock also be prosecuted for their connivance with the accused which is clear from the statement of SI Niraj Pathak, who admitted in para 8 that it is a fact that before drawing up the F.I.R, they knew that the occurrence had been committed by accused Mantu Mandal." (Emphasis Supplied)
We therefore, direct the Director General of Police and also the Secretary, Home Department, Government of Jharkhand, to remain personally present before this Court on the next date of hearing at 10.30 a.m.
The matter is adjourned on tomorrow i.e. 10.10.2012.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.