Read the Batla House verdict (operative portion) in full

New Delhi, Jul 26: Here is the full text of the operative portion of Delhi court verdict in the 2008 Batla House encounter case:IN THE COURT OF SH RAJENDER KUMAR SHASTRIADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE02:SOUTH EASTSAKET COURT: NEW DELHIIN RE:ID No. 02403R0176482010SC No. 42/10FIR No. 208/08PS Jamia NagarStateVs.Shahzad Ahmad @ PappuS/o Sh. Siraj AhmadR/o Rehmani Manjil, Jalandhari,Sadar City, Ajamgarh, U.P. Date of Institution: 26.05.2010Date of arguments: 20.07.2013Date of judgment : 25.07.2013JUDGMENTEntire National Capital of India i.e. Delhi was shaken on 13.09.2008 when five bombs in a chain exploded at different places in its hurt i.e. Connaught Place, Karol Bagh, Greater Kailash and India Gate. Connaught Place and Karol Bagh are commercial hubs of Delhi.Greater Kailash is a posh colony, which gives shelter to salt of its population, while India Gate is a historical and picnic spot, which remain generally crowded. 26 innocent persons lost their lives, while 133 suffered injuries. Five FIRs numbered as 168/08, 130/08, 293/08, 418/08 and 419/08 were registered in PS Karol Bagh, Greater Kailash, Tilak Marg and Connaught Place respectively. An outfit ‘Indian Mujaheddin took responsibility of these blasts by sending emails to various electronic and print media. Special Cell of Delhi Police took the task of investigation. A team under the supervision of Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma was formed to trace out the culprits. When injured started recuperating in hospitals and dead bodies were put to rest, public could take their sleeps well but not the police. In the morning of 19.09.2008 when people were in the process of waking up, the police was engrossed in planning to nab the suspects. SI Rahul Kumar (now Inspector) lodged a complaint (Ex. PW8/C), narrating the incident as: “Today (19.09.2008) at around 8.00 am, a specific information was received to Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma that Bashir @ Atif alongwith associates is residing in the top floor Flat No. 108 of L18, Batla House, Delhi. This information was lodged in Daily Diary and discussed with senior officers. After discussion with senior officers, as per their directions, a team led by Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma consisting of Inspector Sanjay Dutt, SI Dharmender, Kumar, SI Ravinder Kumar Tyagi, SI Dalip Kumar, SI Rakesh Malik, SI Devender Singh, ASI Anil Tyagi, HC Balwant Singh, HC Rajbir Singh, HC Satyender Kumar (No. 391/SB), HC Satyender Kumar (No. 397/SB), HC Vinod Gautam, HC Hansraj, HC Udaivir Singh, HC Manish Kumar, Ct. Gurmeet, Ct. Sandeep, Ct. Birender Negi and Ct. Rajeev including me, was formed to act upon the information. At about 9.30 am, the team left the office of Special Cell NDR with arms and ammunition in our private cars and two twowheelers to apprehend him and his associates. At about 10.30 am, the team of special cell reached Batla House and requested 78 passerby persons to join raiding party after apprising them aboutcontents of information, but none joined by giving genuine excuses. Without wasting further time, Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma briefed the entire team and the team reached at L18, Batla House, Delhi and surrounded the building. At about 11.00 am, Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma alongwith SI Dharmender Kumar, SI Ravinder Kumar Tyagi, HC Balwant Singh, HC Udaivir Singh, HC Satyender (No. 397/SB) and myself entered into the building to conduct raid at flat No. 108, L18, Batla House, Delhi, whereas other team members were deployed at ground floor to cover the building. Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma knocked at the main door of the flat by disclosing his identity, but when the occupants of the flat did not respond, then the team tried to enter into the flat. The main door was found bolted from inside, but the side door was found not to be bolted and it was pushed.Immediately, the team members went inside the flat in order to apprehend the suspects. No sooner did the team entered inside the flat, the occupants of the flat opened fire upon police party. The team members also fired in self defence to apprehend the terrorists. In between, Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, ACP NDR alongwith Inspector Ramesh Chandra Lamba, SI Bhoop Singh, SI Harender Kumar, ASI Satish Kumar, ASI Shahjahan and other staff also reached at the spot. During the cross firing, Inspector Mohan Chand Sharma and HC Balwant Singh sustained bullet injuries. Two militants also sustained bullet injuries in cross firing, while two other militantsmanaged to escape from the flat while firing on the police party. The injured police officers and the militants were immediately removed to hospital. One of the militants namely Mohd. Saif, son of Sh. Shadab Ahmad, resident of Village & PO Sanjarpur, PS Sarai Meer, Tehsil Nijamabad, District Ajamgarh (UP) surrendered before the police party. The names of the escaped militants were revealed by Mohd. Saif as Junaid and Pappu. During the cursory search of the flat, one A.K. Series rifle alongwith two magazines containing 30 live rounds each was recovered from the far end right side room of the militants besides two pistols of .30 bore lying near the two injured militants. The militants have obstructed the police party in discharging their official duties and fired with intent to kill the police officials.” The complaint was endorsed by Inspector J.S. Joon, on the basis of which FIR No. 208/08 was registered in PS Jamia Nagar for offence punishable U/s 186/353/307/332/34 IPC and U/s 25 and 27 of The Arms Act. Apart from aforesaid complaint, one Ovais Malik, resident of House No. J1/A, 4th Floor, Batla House set legal machinery into motion, by informing police control room, that he heard sound of firing between 10.3011.15 am. During investigation, IO Inspector J.S. Joon found following articles lying in that flat: KF049MM22, 8 empty cartridges (fired) having marking of 7.62/2S S&B and three empty cartridges (fired) having marking of KF01A7 and 13 fired bullets. One A.K Series Rifle alongwith two magazines and 60 live cartridges from right side bed room of that flat, one pistol of .30 bore from drawing room alongwith one live cartridge in its chamber having marking of “CAL.30A case titled as Hazari Lal Vs. State (Delhi Administration) AIR 1983 SC 873 where it was observed by the Supreme Court of India that evidence of a Police Officer laying trap if found reliable can be accepted without corroboration.A case titled as Chandra Shekar Vs. State 1986 (2) Crimes 419 where it was observed that in capital offences in highly urbanized areas where it is becoming difficult to involve public witnesses and eyewitnesses it will be dangerous not to rely on the relation witnesses and police witnesses provided such witnesses are confirmed to be truthful considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of that case.Similar was position in case in hand. Due to exigency police could not join any public present near the spot. Moreover witnesses of this case were not the witnesses of investigation rather victims and hence eyewitnesses of incident. I find no reason to discard their testimony, as a waif.Although it is not claimed by Ld. Defence Counsel that Inspector M.C. Sharma died on being fired by police party, it is explained by Ld. Addl. PP that all six members of police party were together when they entered inside Flat No. 108 and they were together when faced firing from occupants of that flat. It was Inspector M.C. Sharma who was ahead of all of team members, while entering inside said flat. Postmortem report of Inspector M.C. Sharma (Ex. PW19/C) is evident that all the injuries found on his person were either in front of him or in insides. No injury found on his posterior, shows that he faced the bullets from his front side and not from back side. In this way, it is clear that Inspector M.C. Sharma suffered bullet injuries on being fired by the occupants of the flat and not by the members of raiding party. Section 37 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 obliges every person to assist the police in getting any offender arrested.It speaks as: “Section 37 – Every person is bound to assist a Magistrate or police officer reasonably, demanding as aid:(a) in the taking or preventing the escape of any otherperson whom such Magistrate or police officer is authorized to arrest.(b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(c) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Trite it to say that police party had gone to Flat No. 108 to apprehend suspect of Delhi Serial Blast, FIRs in respect of which had already been registered. From the deposition of witnesses, who were members of raiding party particularly the eye witnesses i.e. HC Satender (PW7), Inspector Rahul Kumar (PW8), ASI Udaivir Singh (PW11), HC Balwant (PW14), SI Ravinder Kumar Tyagi (PW15) and Inspector Dharmender (PW22), it is well proved that inspite of assisting the police in apprehending suspects if crime, the occupants of that flat including accused Shahzad Ahmad fired at police party. It is also well established on record that Inspector M.C. Sharma and HC Balwant, members of raiding party suffered bullet injury on being fired by occupants of that flat including accused Shahzad Ahmad. From the deposition of Dr. Sanjeev Lalwani (PW27) and postmortem report (Ex. PW19/C), it is clear that Inspector M.C. Sharma died due to bullet injuries suffered in that incident. Similarly, HC Balwant also suffered bullet injury in that incident and as per MLC (Ex. PW19/E) injuries on the person of HC Balwant were grievous in nature. Again, it is proved from the deposition of witnesses discussed above that HC Rajbir was fired at by the same occupants including accused at least twice. Two bullets were found stuck in his bullet proof jacket. In this way, the assailants including accused Shahzad Ahmad tried to kill said HC Rajbir.It did not remain in dispute that all of said victims are officers of Delhi Police and hence public servants. They went to flat No. 108, while investigating a case i.e. in discharge of their public duty. During deliberations, Ld. Defence Counsel contended that when Inspector M.C. Sharma fell down on the ground on being fired at, it would have been the natural response of other members of raiding party to recede from that place, but inspite of going back, the members of raiding party proceeded in their venture to confront the assailants.As per Ld. Counsel, this behaviour was against human nature. Apart from aforesaid fact, it agitates in my mind that the incident in question was not a sudden confrontation between police and the assailants. The police had already an information, receiving which, a raiding party was formed well in advance. Despite all this, Inspector M.C. Sharma did not wear any body protection device i.e. bullet proof jacket. Moreover, at least two members of raiding party were having no weapon with them, despite knowing thte fact that they may face firing.It is not clear whether it was merely a misadventure or lack of professionalism in Delhi Police or scarcity of weapons with Delhi police. Whatsoever it may be, it did not give any licence to the occupants of a flat to fire at police persons who came there to investigate a case, merely because they were unarmed or not wearing any bullet proof jacket. They were expected to assist the police and not to attack them. Accused is thus convicted for offence punishable U/s 186/353/333/307/302/34 IPC. From the statements of same witnesses as mentioned above earlier, it is proved on record that accused Shahzad was having fire arm in his hand, when he fled away from flat No. 108 mentioned above.Though he is alleged to have disclosed to the police that he threw thatt weapon in Gang Nehar, but same could not be recovered. The accused is thus convicted for offence punishable U/s 27/54/59 Act and again for destruction of evidence for offence punishable U/s 201 IPC. Accused Shahzad Ahmad was also charged for the offence of not appearing before the police/ court despite having proclamation issued in that regard. Prosecution failed to prove that any such proclamation was ever issued. Accused is thus acquitted for offence punishable U/s 174 (A) IPC.Announced in open court (RAJENDER KUMAR SHASTRI)today i.e 25th July 2013 Addl. Sessions Judge02:South EastSaket Court: New Delhi

Read the Batla House verdict (operative portion) in full

New Delhi, Jul 26: Here is the full text of the operative portion of Delhi court verdict in the 2008 Batla House encounter case:IN THE COURT OF SH RAJENDER KUMAR SHASTRIADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE­02:SOUTH EASTSAKET COURT:

Read all the Breaking News Live on indiatvnews.com and Get Latest English News & Updates from India

New Delhi, Jul 26: Here is the full text of the operative portion of Delhi court verdict in the 2008 Batla House encounter case:IN THE COURT OF SH RAJENDER KUMAR SHASTRIADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE02:SOUTH EASTSAKET COURT: