news details |
|
|
| Death of political worker murder or accident | | Court directed DGP for further investigation | | Jammu, March 21
Chief Judicial Magistrate Jammu Sanjay Dhar in a case of death of BJP worker during the election campaign 2002, which was investigated by 3 investigating officers and given different versions presented challan in accident death, court disagreed and directed Director General of Police for further investigation of the case. Crime Branch after completion of investigation presented challan in the court of CJM u/s 279/304-A RPC, court at the stage of charge after one through the case dairies and different investigation reports observed that the case was fixed for determination of question of charge/discharge of the accused. In view of the peculiar circumstances leading to filling of the charge-sheet, the case dairy was called and heard the counsel for the accused and Chief Prosecuting Officer for the state and perusal of material on record as well as the case dairy. As per the FIR registered on September 8, 2002, victim Sunil Kumar along with some other people had gone to village Ratniyal for campaigning in favour of BJP. The victim and his associates were asked by some villagers of the said village to stop the campaigning but the victim continued with the campaigning and as result of which the villagers launched a murderous attack on him which resulted injuries to his head and other part of body. The victim was first shifted to GMC hospital Jammu and thereafter to Maharishi Dyanand Hospital, where he died on September 29, 2002. FIR was registered by the P/S Domana and the investigation was entrusted to ASI Onkar Sharma, who recorded the statements of 12 witnesses. He again on October 11, 2002 recorded the statements of five more witnesses; they stated that they had heard that the victim has fallen down from tractor trolley. On November 30, 2002, the same investigating officer recorded the statements of two more witnesses; they stated that they had seen that victim while he was trying to board the tractor trolley was caught by Balbir Kumar and was attacked by his brother Kuldeep Kumar with a brick which he inflicted a blow on back side of victim’s head and he fell down unconscious. On December3, 2002 prosecution witnesse Rak Kumar, Ramji Sharma and Vishal Sharma (accused herein) corroborated the version of murder of victim and given by the prosecution witnesses in their statement on November 30, 2002.
The investigation was handed over to Pritam Singh Jamwal DySP District Special Branch on January 14, 2003. He reconstructed the scene of crime and recorded the statements of witness already examined by earlier IO. Now the witnesses who had accompanied the victim also changed their stand and in their statements recorded on Marc 3, 2003 supported the version relating to murder victim by Balbir Kumar and Kuldeep Kumar. The IO also got the statements of Ramji Sharma and Vishal Sharma (accused herein) recorded before the magistrate u/s 164 CrPC on September 24, 2003. In their statements these two supported the version of murder. The said two accused were arrested namely Kuldeep Kumar and Balbir Kumar. The said IO concluded at this stage that charge-sheet for offence u/s 302/34 RPC laid in the court. However, the investigation of the case was handed over to Crime Branch Jammu under the order of DGP issued on December 22, 2003.
MA Goni DySP Crime Branch Jammu took over the investigation. However, without making any further headway, the investigation was then handover to Inspector Crime Branch TP Singh on April 30, 2004. The said investigator again examined the witnesses who had propounded story of murder of Sunil Kumar and most of these witnesses resiled from their earlier versions and stated that they did not see the victim being attacked by Balbir Kumar and Kuldeep Kumar. The IO also examined some villagers of Ratniyal who propounded the story that the victim in fact fallen down from the speedy tractor trolley being driven by accused Vishal Sharma and this had resulted in the injury and consequent death of victim. In these circumstances the present charge-sheet had been laid before the court.
CJM Jammu Sanjay Dhar after perusal of the case dairy reveals that the investigation conducted by the inspector of crime branch leaves much to be desired raises more question than fulfilling the gaps left behind by the earlier investigation. He has adopted a noble way of investigating the crime has accepted affidavits attested by notary from some villagers of Ratniyal wherein they have deposed that the victim fell down from a speedy tractor trolley. These affidavits submitted by the witnesses before the police are not admissible in evidence. If at all these witnesses prepared to depose on oath with regard to the occurrence, the proper course for the IO was to get their statements recorded u/s 164 CrPC before a magistrate. The code of criminal procedure does not envisage recording of statements of witnesses on notarized affidavits during the investigation of the case. After quoting judgments of the Supreme Court, CJM further observed that it is clear in the provision that there is nothing which bans the investigating agency from making further investigation. If the Court reaches the conclusion that investigating agency has failed to collect material evidence and investigation was not fair and proper, then the definitely the Court is entitled to direct further investigation of the case. The power of magistrate to order further investigation has been recognized by the Supreme Court in its catena of judgments delivered from time to time. In the present case some important aspects have been left out and the investigation has not been conducted in a fair manner and such this is a fit case where directions for further investigations are required. With these observations CJM directed DGP J&K that he shall entrusted the further investigation of the case to a team of officers with established record of professional efficiency. The investigation team shall conduct further investigation of the case conclude it preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of taking over the investigation.
While directing further investigation, CJM Jammu further observed that a perusal of the case dairy reveals that father of the victim at one point of time had approached the High Court by way of writ petition seeking expeditious investigation into the circumstances leading to the death of his son and the High Court had passed certain directions in this regard. DGP J&K shall take note of said directions and expedite the matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
