Samjhauta Express Case Judgment1 PDF
Samjhauta Express Case Judgment1 PDF
Samjhauta Express Case Judgment1 PDF
com)
VERSUS
Argued by:Shri R.K. Handa and Shri Rajan Malhotra, Special Public
Prosecutors assisted by Shri Vishal Garg, S.P., NIA, New
Delhi for the NIA.
Shri Subhash Sharma (R) , Advocate, Shri Jagdish Singh
Rana, Advocate for accused Naba Kumar Sarkar @ Swami
Aseemanand.
Shri Mukesh Garg, Advocate for accused Kamal Chouhan.
Accused Ranbir Singh, Advocate for accused Lokesh
Sharma.
Ms. Sumanjit Kaur, Advocate for accused Rajender
Chaudhary
Accused Naba Kumar Sarkar @ Aseemanand on bail,
whereas accused Kamal Chauhan, Lokesh Sharma and
Rajender Chaudhary are in custody.
JUDGMENT
case FIR No. 09 dated 29.07.2010 under section 120-B IPC read with
Sections 302, 307, 324, 326, 124-A, 438 & 440 of IPC, Sections 150,
Public Property Act, 1984 and Sections 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 & 23 of the
investigation in the present crime i.e. FIR No. 28/2007 dated 19.02.2007,
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
departure to Attari and as per its schedule, it departed from the said
platform for Attari at about 2250 hours. Kiran Diwan, Sanjay Kumar and
railways officials, namely, Shaukat Ali, Head TTE, Rajesh Sharma, TTE
and Lalit Kumar, TTE were also on board. The train had 16 coaches
were placed in the middle of the train, whereas unreserved coaches were
placed in front portion (engine side) and in the rear portion (guard side).
the train was passing through Diwana Railway Station near Panipat,
killed at the spot and 13 persons got injured who were shifted to
Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi for treatment, where one injured person,
namely, Harril also succumbed to his injuries and thus, total 68 persons
discharged from the hospital after their treatment. During the course of
suitcase was recovered from the spot down the railway line (on the
etc., found at the scene of crime, were duly examined by the experts. The
Further stated that it was revealed that suit case cover with APOLO 600
(hand written on it) was purchased from Abhinandan Bag Centre, Kothari
Market, Indore. Puran Singh, a worker of the shop was on the sales
counter at that time time. Iqbal Hussain, a tailor of M.K. Bag Centre,
Kothari Market, Indore had stitched the same cover and put his mark on
the cover by writing APOLO 600. The questioned writing “APOLO 600”
written with blue ball point pen on the inner side of the suit case
Madhuban (Haryana) and as per FSL report, the questioned writing was
that of Iqbal Hussain. The blue colour cloth which was seized from
Abhinandan Bag Cenre and the Denim Jeans cloth seized from M K Bag
Centre, Kothari Market, Indore were also sent to FSL, Madhuban and as
per FSL report, the clothes seized from Abhimandan Bag Centre and M K
appearance, texture with the suit case covers found at the scene of crime.
of Shabridham in the year 1999 and became his close disciple and during
the year 2003 Swami Asimanand met one Pragya Singh, resident of Surat
and Sunil Joshi @ Manoj. All four of them viz., Sunil Joshi @ Manoj,
Bharat Bhai, Pragya Singh and Asimanand were very close to each other.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
his feelings of anger during discussion with Sunil Joshi @ Manoj, Pragya
Singh and Bharat Bhai. All of them discussed the issue of Islamic
discussed about Jihadi attacks on Hindu places of worships and the need
to give befitting replies. During March 2006, after the blast at Sankat
terror attacks on the Islamic religious sites. Sunil Joshi informed him that
he had some boys who were capable of doing such actions, but he also
added that undertaking of any such mission would incur heavy financial
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
the raw material for fabricated IED for arms and ammunition and other
connections, for which Asimanand readily agreed and gave Rs. 25,000/-
in cash to Sunil Joshi and directed him to visit several places in UP and
leaders. Further stated that in May 2006, Sunil Joshi visited Shabridham
Sunil Joshi and Bharat Bhai briefed him about their visit. Sunil Joshi told
Asimanand that they had gone first to Jharkhand where Devender Gupta
explosives. After that, they had gone to Agra and further gone to
Gorakhpur but could not get any help from any quarter. Sunil Joshi further
met Indresh Kumar who helped him financially by giving him Rs.
Valsaad for chalking out the future strategy of their mission. Further stated
that during June 2006, the main conspiracy meeting took place which was
alleged that in the said meeting, Sunil Joshi @ Manoj pronounced that
“yeh sabhi kaam ke ladke hai.” Asimanand presided over the meeting in
which he said “bomb ka jawab bomb se dena chahiye” and all agreed with
his views. During the meeting, Sandeep Dange @ Teacher got suddenly
agitated and said “Chaaron taraf mandiron per hamley ho rahe hain aur
Hindu baithey hua hain, kuch nahi kar rahe hain.” Sunil Joshi said “Yahan
Hindu mar rahe hain, aur bharat sarkar samjhauta train chala rahi hai ,” to
Sandeep Dange was very annoyed with the inaction by the Hindu leaders
and he taunted “Swamiji jaise Hindu baithe hue hain, waise hi aap bhi
baithe rahoge; jo kaam karne wala hai who kaam karege hi.” Then
Hindus and their religious sites and Sunil Joshi took the responsibility of
causing all the blasts. Sunil Joshi also talked about targeting Samjhauta
Express train about which he had already discussed with Sandeep Dange.
Sunil Joshi informed that Samjhauta train runs from India to Pakistan as a
hamla kathe ja rahe hain or hum unse Samjhauta karne ke liye train chala
rahein hain.” He said that they should any how stop this train and stressed
to target this train because most of the travellers in this train are Pakistani
Muslims. He also stated that “Is main visphot karne ke liye alag kism ka
bomb lagaana padega; daair sara chemical istemal karna padegaa, chunki
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
making bombs and he would undertake this project. Asimanand told Sunil
“paisa dene wale aur bhi log hain.” Sunil Joshi also told Asimanand that
Rs. 25,000/- which he had given to him earlier in the month of March,
2006 were spent on procuring train tickets for Bharat Bhai, for himself
and for procuring some SIM cards, arms and explosives. Sunil Joshi
briefed them in the said meeting about the operational modus operandi to
be employed for causing all the bomb blasts. He told that there would be
motivating youths for the missions and providing shelter to the field
people who would actually fabricate the bombs (IEDs) and plant them at
respective places. When Asimanand asked Sunil Joshi “ Par Manoj bomb
lagane ke liye chauthe group ki jaroorat nahi hai kya? .” Then Sunil Joshi
assured that he had already thought about it and he was of the firm belief
that the third group which would make bomb should plant it also because
further added that all these groups would not have any link among
know the particulars of the members of the groups. Sunil further clarified
that “Swamiji aap aur Bharat Bhai jaise log pehele group ke sadasye
hain.” After this, meeting was concluded and Asimanand left for Ashram
Sharma and Amit also left the venue. Sunil Joshi @ Manoj, Pragya Singh
and Bharat Bhai stayed back. After Diwali in 2006, Sunil Joshi again met
26.09.2006 were done by his boys and informed that “ Swamiji ye hamare
District Tapi in his Santro car in the morning hours and by about 11.00
A.M., both Bharat Bhai and Sunil Joshi joined him the temple to celebrate
Shivratri. In the late evening hours, Sunil Joshi told Asimanand in the
Veranda outside the rooms that “news dekhte rahiyega, kuch achhi kabar
do-char din me milegi.” They spent the night in the premises of temple.
Next day, after taking breakfast, all left Balpur. Further it is case of the
prosecution that around 20.02.2007 i.e. after four days from Shivratri,
Pragya alongwith her associates Neera Singh and one Ritesh Sharma
Ashram’s Jeep to the Ahwa bus-stand to pick them up. Sunil Joshi also
arrived on the same day in the Ashram and after that Sunil Joshi, Pragya
and Asimanand had a secret meeting and on seeing Sunil Joshi after the
Samjhauta blast Asimanand asked him privately to prick his ego as “aap
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
baithe ho.” But Sunil Joshi replied “Swamiji ye hamare logon ka hi kaam
Gujarat, how could he do this incident at such a far off place. To this,
Sunil Joshi replied that it was Teacher’s (Sandeep Dange) work and
further told that “yakeen maniye swami yeh hamare Teacher (Sandeep
Dange) aur uske ladkon ka him kaam hai.” It is futher alleged that during
the year 2007, Sunil asked Asimanand for some more money for the next
Asimanand was prepared for this and gave him Rs. 40,000/- in cash. In
the month of May 2007, Bharat Bhai called Asimanand on phone and told
for conveying some news. After about a week, Sunil Joshi visited
Sabridham and met Asimanand and that time, he was carrying a Telugu
newspaper which contained the news about the Mecca Masjid blast in
again done by his boys. Sunil Joshi said “Swamji yeh hamara hi kaam
hai”. Some days before the Ajmer blast, which took place on 11.10.2007,
Sunil Joshi called Swami Asimanand on phone and said that “Swamiji
khabarein sunte rahna, Jaldi hi achi Khabar milegi.” That allegedly after a
few days, Sunil Joshi visited Sabridham alongwith one Raj and one
Mehul and told Swami Asimanand that “his boys carried out this blast
Asimanand called one Col. P.S. Purohit and told that “Manoj apna
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
further asked him to get information from his sources as to who had
speech alongwith Col. P.S. Purohit for starting a new Hindu organization,
namely, Abhinav Bharat. Swami Asimanand further went to Pune and met
They hurriedly sat in his car alongwith their 5-6 bags which were
apparently heavy and all three proceeded towards Vadodara. During the
travel, on being asked, Sandeep Dange informed that they were coming
from Maharashtra. They appeared to be very tense and during the entire
watching this news on TV, Manoj @ Sunil Joshi cheerfully stated that
“Accha hua, yeh kaam apne Teacher @ Sandeep aur uske ladko ka hai,
Finally usne kar hi diya.” Some months later, on 11.10.2007, Sunil Joshi
called Bharat Bhai and told him to switch on the TV and further told him
that “Hamne Diwali Ke Bomb Phod Diye.” Bharat Bhai switched on the
12.00 p.m., when Neera, Pragya and Lovely (Sister of Pragya) were
asked whether “Ladke thik hain?” and immediately after phone call,
there was no TV set in Pragya’s house) and asked the lady present in the
house to switch on the TV set. When the TV was switched on, the news
about Samjhauta Express blast was being flashed in all the news channels.
On seeing the visuals of the dead bodies being recovered from the blast
site, Neera got seriously disturbed and started crying. On seeing this,
Pragya asked Neera that “tum kyon ro rahi ho”, to which Neera Singh
replied “Dekho kitne aur log mar gaye hain” Sadhvi Pragya on the
contrary was very jubilant and excited and she gleefully said “tum ro mat,
yeh to sab kattley mar rahe hai.” After watching the news, Pragya Singh
expressed her desire to eat ice cream to celebrate the occasion. It is further
management to Pragya Singh, Ramji and Lokesh Sharma were given the
reports of various mobile phones, it was revealed that accused Sunil Joshi
was in the Kothari market, Indore area on 14.02.2007 i.e. the day on
which the suitcase covers of IEDs were procured from the Kothari market,
during the months of February and March, 2007. While Asimanand was
developed close friendly relations with one Shakti Singh and one Ajay
Samjhauta train blast case. Asimanand informed him that several agencies
including police were behind him. Ajay Chauhan had even advised him to
surrender before the court at Haridwar itself, which he did not do.
Bharat Bhai) where he disclosed and pointed out the place of conspiracy
and also showed the place where he had given Rs. 25,000/- to late Sunil
Joshi for the preparation and arranging the raw materials in March, 2006
Shiv Mandir, Balpur where Sunil Joshi had informed him that “ News
explosives and IED in his house, which were apparently used by Ramji
after being removed from the house of Sunil Joshi after his murder on
conspiracy and after the commission of the terrorist act in the instant case,
Manoj Joshi @ Manoj Singh @ Manoj and other suspected persons from
with each other during the period 2005 and 2007 with the motive of
and facilitated each other and acted in several ways in concert amongst
and grievous injuries to 12 other persons who were travelling in the said
read with Sections 302, 307, 326, 324, 124-A, 438, 440 of IPC and under
Sections 150, 151, 152 of the Railways Act and under Sections 3 & 4 of
Sections 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 & 23 of the Unlawful Activities
investigation, final report under section 173 Cr.P.C. was initially filed on
pertinent to mention here that since Sunil Joshi had expired prior to the
filing of final report by the NIA, therefore charges against him were
proceedings qua him was also filed alongwith the charge-sheet. It is also
Hakla, Rajender Chaudhary etc. and that they have been imparted training
about preparation of pipe bombs and firing of pistol. Further stated that as
they reached Delhi by Indore Intercity Express and retruned on the same
day after completing the assigned task. It is further stated that accused
stated that during the course of investigation, it was revealed that accused
they took a local train and reached Old Delhi railway station and stayed in
the dormitory room at Old Delhi railway station and reached the platform
train and then to Indore by bus. That role of Amit Hakla as one of the
emerged during the investigation. It is also stated that during the course of
deceased Sunil Joshi, Ramji, Lokesh Sharma, Samundar and others. That
proclaimed person) vide charge sheet No. 03-A dated 09.08.2012. Further,
investigation continued u/s 173 (8) Cr.P.C. It is stated that during further
point out memos of the places were papread as per his disclosure. It is
also stated that accused Rajender Chaudhary led NIA team to forest area
Bagli village, Dewas (M.P.) and showed the exact place where
demonstration of bomb explosion took place and the soil samples of the
crater formed due to the blast were taken for examination and were sent to
deceased Sunil Joshi, Ramji, Shivam Dhakad, Pragya Singh and Indresh
Kumar where status and plight of Hindus and regular attack on Hinuds by
Jehadi Muslims etc. were discussed and discussion also took place to do
something to stop it. That during investigation, efforts were made to track
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
12.06.2013.
and Rajender Chaudhary vide order dated 24.01.2014 passed by the then
Special Judge under NIA Act and accordingly all these accused were
Section 302 read with 120-B IPC, Section 307 read with 120-B IPC,
Section 124-A read with 120-B IPC, Section 438 IPC read with 120-B
IPC, Section 440 IPC read with 120-B IPC, Sections 150(e), 151 & 153 of
the Railways Act, 1989, Sections 3 & 4 of the Explosive Substances Act,
claimed trial.
Prosecution Evidence
many as 224 witnesses i.e. PW-1 ASI Mahinder Singh, No.980, P.S.
GRP, Karnal; PW-2 Ranjit Singh, retired SI, PW-3 Ramdhan Singh, Train
Station, Old Delhi; PW-10 Ashok Kumar, Gateman, Gate No. 50,
Railway Station, Diwana; PW-11 Babu Lal Meena, Guard (Goods Train),
Clerk, Railway Station, New Delhi; PW-14 Rakesh Kumar Maini, Senior
Booking Clerk, Railway Station, Old Delhi; PW-15 Diwan Singh son of
Tarlok Singh; PW-16 D.K. Nayyar, Chief Ticket Inspector, Line (Retd.),
Tarsem Lal, RPF Out Post, Attari, Amritsar (Punjab); PW-26 Dr. Archna
SMO, ESI Hospital, Panipat; PW-28 Dr. Ashwani Kumar Garg, Deputy
Chawla Medical College, Karnal; PW-34 Dr. Jai Kishore, Dy. Civil
Karnal; PW-36 Dr. Munish Pruthi, SMO, General Hospital, Karnal; PW-
Dr. Shashi Garg, Dy. Civil Surgeon, Panipat; PW-41 Dr. Shiv Kumar,
Medical Officer, ESI Hospital, Panipat; PW-42 Dr. Rahul Diwan, (Sr.
Panipat; PW-48 Dr. S.P. Singhal, SMO, Kalpana Chawla Govt. Medical
Medical Officer, ESI Dispensary, Sonepat; PW-53 Jai Singh, retired ASI;
PW-57 ASI Gulzar Singh, CIA, GRP, Ambala Cantt; PW-58 Bir Singh,
retired SI, P.S. GRP, Ambala Cantt; PW-59 Pala Singh, retired SI, P.S.
GRP, Ambala Cantt; PW-60 Hoshiar Singh, retired SI, P.P. GRP, Kaithal;
PW-61 Jeet Singh, retired SI, Police Line, GRP, Ambala City; PW-62
Surender Kumar, retired SI, P.S. GRP, Kurukshetra; PW-63 Dr. Hitesh
Kumar, CIA, GRP, Ambala Cantt; PW-66 ASI Dariya Singh, PP GRP,
Samalkha, District Panipat; PW-67 ASI Satish Kumar, CIA Staff, GRP,
GRP, Hissar; PW-72 ESI Ram Kumar, GRP, Karnal; PW-73 ASI Ram
GRP, Panipat; PW-77 Hori Lal, retired ASI, GRP, Kurukshetra; PW-78
Mahar Singh, retired SI, P.S. GRP, Karnal; PW-79 Sher Jang Singh,
retired Inspector, P.S. GRP, Karnal, PW-80 Dr. Vandana, Medical Officer,
ESI Dispensary No. 2, Panipat; PW-81 Ram Chander, retired SI, P.S.
Snehi Raj, ASI, P.S. GRP, Rohtak; PW-84 Basant Sing, retired Chief
Train Clerk; PW-85 Sanjay Kumar, Inspector, 3rd IRB, Sunaria, District
Rohtak; PW-86 Suresh Kumar, ASI, P.P. GRP, Ganaur, District Sonepat;
Hussain; PW-90 Istkaar Ali; PW-91 Mohd. Zakir; PW-92 Suresh Kumar,
ASI, P.S. GRP, Sonepat; PW-93 Abdul Karim Khan; PW-94 Navi Mohd.
Khan; PW-95 Idrish; PW-96 Fayyaz; PW-97 Dharam Pal Singh; PW-98
116 Vinod Singh Kushwah; PW-117 Mohan Lal, Chief Train Controller,
PW-136 Dr. Ram Partap Sing; PW-137 Neera @ Poppy Singh @ Neera
140 Smt. Aruna Thakur; PW-141 Ajay Chauhan; PW-142 Shakti Singh;
145 Pardeep Saxena; PW-146 Rahat Abrar; PW-147 Deep Bhatia; PW-
148 Krishan Pal Singh Tomar; PW-149 Udai Bhan Sen; PW-150 G.L.
NIA, New Delhi; PW-199 Pardip Baburao Mane, Inspector, NIA, New
Delhi; PW-200 Pyare Lal Chaurasia, DSP, NIA, Head Quarter, New
Delhi; PW-201 Narender Singh Jangid, Inspector, NIA, New Delhi; PW-
202 Rakesh Singh, Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra; PW-
State Cyber and Hytech Crime, P.S. Bhopal; PW-207 Vipin Kumar,
Jasveer Singh, DSP, NIA, Gauhati; PW-210 Dr. A.K. Dalela, Controller
S.P., CBI, New Delhi; PW-212 Kanchan Mahi, Addl. Sessions Judge,
Commandant, CISF, SHEP Salal, J&K; PW-216 Sameer Pal Srow, IAS,
PW-217 Sudesh Kumar, Addl. Sessions Judge, Patiala House, New Delhi;
PW-218 Anil Kumar, DSP, NIA, New Delhi; PW-219 Inderjit Singh
Bisht, DSP, NIA, Mumbai; PW-220 Col. Prasad Srikant Purohit, Liasion
District & Sessions Judge, Panipat; PW-222 Nitish Kumar, IPS, IGP at
Parkash, Assistant Nodal Officer, Idea Cellular Ltd., Panchkula and PW-
to them in their examination under Secton 313 Cr.P.C and all the accused
Section 313 Cr.P.C. and pleaded innocence and false implication. Accused
being wrong, incorrect and not within his knowledge. He also pleaded that
Garg and other NIA officials forced and compelled him to make statement
Ex.PW202/5 and said statement was neither voluntary nor true. That he
has been falsely implicated in the case and CBI officials and officials of
while in their custody and threatened that his family members would be
Delhi as they had threatened him not to disclose to the Magistrate that he
has been deposing under duress and threat.That after completion of his
and then from 03.01.2011 to 13.01.2011 and during this period of police
custody, NIA officials including CIO Nitesh Kumar and Vishal Garg
story given by them, which was not at all true. That he was produced
he has been falsely implicated. That during his police custody, he was
taken to Daman where he was forced to sign on few papers and he did not
point out any place at Valsad, Balpur or Shabri Dham. That on 13.1.2011
he was admitted to Central Jail, Ambala where senior NIA officer Lok
Nath Behra alongwith other NIA officials visited Central Jail Ambala and
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
and Mr. Behra assured him that after the desired statement, he will be set
free otherwise he will have to serve his whole life in Jail and that this
pressurized him to make the statement as per their directions and warned
him not to disclose to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panchkula and under
21.01.2011 from Central Jail Ambala and was produced before Chief
till 11.02.2011 and remained in Central Jail Ajmer for a long time. That on
Ajmer with the direction to forward the same and the Superintendent,
Central Jail, Ajmer vide covering letter dated 10.04.2011 forwarded the
Court at Panchakula through post, which was received in the court and
the Hon’ble court directed the Ahlmad to place on record and the same is
marked as Mark PW224/DA, which bears his signature on each and every
page and the same may be taken into consideration. That after 13.01.2011,
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
11, thereby informing the court about the excesses done by investigating
Judicial custody in Ajmer, one T. Raja Balaji, S.P., C.B.I, on the pretext of
2011 to 14-03-2011 and during this period, said official again pressurized
him not to engage any lawyer and not to disclose this fact to anybody that
allowed to interrogate him for nine days starting from 16-3-2011 and
because of the constant pressure and threat from the various agencies, he
could not disclose fact of forcible statement to anybody. That on his first
before Magistrate at Delhi by CBI and NIA at Panchkula and that when he
Investigating Officer nor did he pointed out any place and that he has
that the same are wrong and incorrect. He has pleaded that his signatures
were obtained on blank papers during his police custody and he has not
mentally and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. That he was
08.02.2012 at Depalpur police station and kept him in police custody for
the whole day and night and again taken him to Depalpur police station on
09.02.2012 and again brought him back to camp office, NIA, Indore.
That he was physically and mentally tortured and was brought to Guest
his other family members if he would not put his signatures. That he was
point of time. Thereafter, he was again kept in Guest House, NIA, Noida
such place and he never visited any such place earlier to his arrest. That
Investigating Officer, NIA and was kept in SAF Guest House, Indore
where NIA officials forcibly obtained his signatures on blank papers and
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
visited such places during his life time. Further, accused Lokesh Sharma
has pleaded that he has no concern with the alleged incident and denied
accused Rajender Choudhary has also pleaded that he has no concern with
the alleged incident and has denied entire circumstances as being wrong
and incorrect and not within his knowledge. He has pleaded that NIA
physically and mentally. Neither did he show any place to NIA officials
nor they took him to any place but his signatures were obtained on blank
papers at the time of his police custody. Further pleaded that he was
Ujjain and was brought to NIA Guest House, Noida where NIA officials
to Airport, Indore by Inspector, NIA and was kept at Rest House and his
signatures were obtained forcibly on blank papers and the same were
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
memos and he never visited such places during his lifetime. That he is
Defence Evidence
defence and the accused have not adduced any oral evidence in their
Arguments
14. Sh. R.K. Handa and Sh. Rajan Malhotra, learned SPPs for
Express) caught fire after bomb explosion while passing through Diwana
were killed and 12 persons were injured. Learned SPPs have submitted
that in this regard, several witnesses have been examined, who have duly
proved the occurrence. The evidence of GRP officials i.e. PW-1, PW-2
etc, evidence of railway employees i.e. PW-3, PW-4, PW-5, PW-6, PW-7,
PW-9 etc. and further evidence of witnesses i.e. PW-88, PW-89, PW-91,
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
80 etc. duly prove the occurrence in which several persons lost their lives
Police and then investigation was taken over by NIA after re-registration
of the plan was done by the accused in conspiracy with each other. It is
Chaudhary and Lokesh Sharma were arrested and accused persons also
conspiratorial meetings were held and preparatory acts were carried out
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
chain of circumstances making out guilt of accused persons and the same
is sufficient for conviction of the accused for the offences with which they
Chaudhary etc. also attended training at Bagli forest area in Dewas (M.P.)
pistol. It is further submitted that after taking 4 suit cases containing IEDs
offender), the accused reached Old Delhi railway station and planted the
therefore guilt of the accused is duly made out. It is further submitted that
proof does not mean rigid mathematical formula since that is impossible
and proof must mean such evidence as would induce a reasonable man to
only the physical object produced, but also the place from where it is
causes and pointing out place to the police officer where offence was
accused Lokesh Sharma and were absconding from Depalpur after the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Ld. Magistrate took all necessary precautions required under the law
of the confession reflects that it was voluntary in nature and is not a result
crime and in this regard, reference has been made to statements of PW-
of accused Aseemanand also and in this regard, reference has been made
that as per FSL reports, the cause of fire in Samjhauta Express train was
blast. It is further submitted that two suit cases were also found lying
on/near railway tracks and both the suit cases were found containing
used for causing explosion in the said train. Further submitted that reports
submitted that prosecution has also duly proved sanction for prosecution
of the accused persons under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908; under
Act, 1967 qua accused persons and therefore, all the accused persons be
SPPs have placed reliance upon case law titled Harpal Singh @ Chhota
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Nadu, 1994 (2) RCR (Criminal) 731; State of M.P, through CBI Vs
Paltan Mallah, 2005 (1) RCR (Criminal) 949; Pawan Mandal and
2010 (2) SCC 583; Chattar Singh and Anr. Vs State of Haryana,
1999 (4) RCR (Criminal) 75; Rakesh Kumar & Ors Vs State, 2010
15. On the other hand, learned counsel for the accused have
That none of the prosecution witnesses has come forward to establish the
with respect to Samjhauta Express train blast. It is argued that none of the
PW-187, PW-188 etc. have supported the prosecution version and have
categorically denied that any conspiracy meeting was held and attended
touchstone of two tests laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court i.e. (i) as if
agency and the circumstances under which the accused is forwarded for
statement are seen, then it is apparently made out that accused was
23.12.2010 and first police remand was obtained on 23.12.2010 and again
police remand was sought and taken from 24.12.2010 to 03.01.2011 and
then again police remand was taken from 03.01.2011 to 13.01.2011 i.e.
Cr.P.C., but the Investigating Officer concealed this fact while moving
had not even informed said court as if the accused was willing to make
any statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. Further pointed out that Investigating
Officer had also not taken any permission from the remanding court to
produce the accused for recording his statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. before
learned C.J.M., Panchkula and once the designated court had remanded
the accused to judicial custody, then it was the duty of the Investigating
Officer to hand over the accused to concerned jail authorities, but instead
to get recorded the statement of the accused u/s 164 Cr.P.C. It is further
before Special NIA court, thereby submitting that he is innocent and has
before Ld. CJM Panchkula for recording his statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. and
moreover the application was not even signed by the accused, which itself
of the accused was not voluntary one. It is also pointed out that while
thereby that till then, accused Aseemanand was merely a witness and not
statement of such person could not have arisen and this fact again casts
15.01.2011 nor any direction was given to the jail authorities by the then
C.J.M., Panchkula to the effect that statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. has to be
should be allowed to meet the accused in Central Jail, Ambala till his
Rakesh Singh, the then C.J.M., Panchkula and PW-224 Vishal Garg,
and after recording his statement on 15.01.2011, again his custody was
handed over to NIA officials, which clearly reflects that accused was not
given any time to come out of the influence/shadow and pressure of the
submitted that apart from this, such confessional statement is also not
proved to be true because the facts mentioned in the said statement are not
accused has not shown his own involvement in any alleged agreement,
placed upon such statement even otherwise also. It is also pointed out that
even though two days time was sought by accused Aseemanand for free
thinking as he had not decided to make any statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. on
13.01.2011, but it cannot be said that it was time given for reflection and
as per order dated 15.01.2011, accused was given merely 10 minutes time
for reflection when he was produced by the NIA officials and the same
cannot be said to be sufficient time for reflection in view of the fact that
he was in custody of NIA for more than 20 days in the present case and
for about 24 days in the custody of CBI prior to that and as such, this
much time was not sufficient for the accused to come out of the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
police custody. It is also submitted that during the first remand of the
agency and during the next spell of police remand from 03.01.2011 to
06.01.2011 and one disclosure memo and three pointing out memos along
with respective site plans were prepared and no other evidence was
per their dictation. Further submitted that factum of forcing the accused to
the court that his statement was not voluntary and that he was forced to
further proves that so called confessional statement was not voluntary and
it cannot be relied upon. In this regard, it is pointed out that after sending
NIA court at Panchkula, accused was first produced in person before the
on that very day, thereby informing the court that his statement has been
made under coercion. It is also pointed out that this accused also moved
through concerned jail authorities and the same was forwarded by the
Superintendent, Central Jail, Ajmer and the said application has been
NIA officials and that accused has also stated that on 15.01.2011, before
which he is alleged to have committed and unless he admits all such facts
confession is voluntary and also that it is true and for the purpose of
compare it with the rest of the prosecution evidence and the probabilities
of the case. Further submitted that if the provision of Section 164 Cr.P.C.
are not complied with in letter and spirit, then confessional statement
of Ld. Magistarte do not show that any specific questions were put to the
relied upon. It is also submitted that it is settled law that Magistrate must
law and the law laid down and in the instant case, learned Magistrate has
erred in not recording the statement of accused u/s 164 Cr.P.C. in strict
conformity to the laid down law. In this regard, it is pointed out that as per
law laid down, accused should be assured of protection from any sort of
accused as to the custody from which he was produced and the treatment
which he had been receiving in such custody in order to ensure that there
Magistrate i.e. PW-202 Rakesh Singh, learned CJM, Panchkula, has not
assured the fact that accused was or was not under any sort of influence of
Chapter 13, Volume III of High Court Rules and Orders, the Magistrate
during which he has been in the custody of the police and the Magistrate
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Magistrate has completely violated the rules by not observing the same at
presence of NIA officials was prevalent around the accused during the
entire period prior to and subsequent to the recording of his statement and
voluntary.
Patel have not supported the prosecution case on this aspect and have
categorically stated that all the aforesaid memos and site plans were
discovery of any new fact or no recovery of any material object was ever
motive on the part of this accused to commit the crime and none of the
but again concerned witnesses i.e. PW-141 Ajay Chauhan and PW-142
Shakti Singh have not lent any support to the version of the prosecution
and prosecution case falls to the ground. It is further argued that so far as
does not lend any support to the prosecution case because so called
been relied upon in the present case because the same has not been
produced and proved in this case and the statement of PW-153 Shekh
Abdul Khaleem does not come within the purview of extra judicial
submitted that PW-153 Shekh Abdul Khaleem is a tool who has been used
by the investigating agency as this person, having shady past and confined
in jail, might have been made a got up witness on some promise by the
of an opportunity to talk to him so freely would not arise and this fact
namely, Indresh, Pragya Thakur, Bharat Bhai Rateshwar etc. were also
Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, only portion of the statement
police before recording the disclosure statement, then pointing out memo
is also argued that neither any call records were collected to reflect
footage pertaining to the alleged acts has come on record and thus, the
best evidence, which could have clinched the issue, was withheld by the
prosecution. It is also submitted that it is settled law that where the case
justified only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are
any other person and further golden principle running through web of
criminal justice is that suspicion, howsoever grave, cannot take the place
which ‘may be true’ and if two views are possible, then accused must be
case of heinous crime. That the prosecution has failed to adduce evidence
accused has also made submissions and all the submissions are in fact on
the same lines as submitted by other counsel and noted hereinabove and
thus the same need not be repeated again for the sake of brevity.
theses accused in the occurrence in question, therefore all the accused are
pertaining to the incident. It is pointed out that on the day of incident, one
Rana Shokat Ali and one Ruksana Khatoon and their six children were
travelling in the said train and the investigators got prepared sketches of
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
and the said sketches were widely published in electronic and print media
the said sketches is lodged in Amritsar jail in case FIR No. 8 dated
the Foreigners Act registered at P.S. GRP, Amritsar, who was arrested on
Ajmat Ali and obtained his custody from Amritsar jail and the application
Further pointed out that as per the investigation, said Ajmat Ali had
entered India without Passport and Visa on 03.11.2006 and had visited
Bombay, Ajmer, Kanpur, Goa etc. with Hindu names on fake IDs. Further
submitted that inspite of such vital leads, the then Investigators got
discharged said Ajmat Ali and in this regard, reference has been made to
statement of PW-196 Inspector Gurdeep Singh who has stated that as per
directions of Senior Officers i.e. the then S.P. Ms. Bharti Arora and the
then DIG, application was moved for discharge of said suspect Ajmat Ali
argued that despite such vital leads, the investigating agencies, especially
the NIA has failed to conduct its investigation by joining of such suspects,
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
pointed out that one Mohd. Usman was found in the compartment of ill-
fated train along with two unexploded IEDs i.e. live suitcase bombs and
railway track and statement of said Mohd. Usman was also got recorded
u/s 164 Cr.P.C. and a bare perusal of his statement makes out that his
off and the NIA never associated or interrogated said Mohd. Usman in
when he confronted Mohd. Usman regarding the suit cases lying with
disowned. It is further pointed out that from the prosecution story and the
evidence, it comes out that all the passengers of the said train were shifted
in other coaches/bogie and all the passengers except said Mohd. Usman
and injured persons left for their destination at Attari border and this fact
further compounds the doubt about the role of said Mohamad Usman, but
unfortunately and for the reasons best known to the investigating agency,
said suspect was never interrogated to unearth the real truth behind the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
does not reflect name of ASI Raj Singh and the investigating officers
record and it seems that investigators were acting at the behest of some
pointed out that name of one Abdul Razak appeared in the NARCO test
27.03.2008 at Indore and this aspect is part of the records and said Safdar
Nagori is found to have categorically stated in his test report to the effect
that in Samjhauta Express blast, some persons from Pakistand had come
and they had purchased suitcase cover at Kataria Market, Indore and one
Taslim had helped them to get the suitcase cover stitched and Abdul
Razak had helped Pakistanis in Samjhauta Express train blast and that
presently he had been arrested and that before Samjhauta Express blast,
Abdul Razak had informed him that he alone was to carry one target and
said Samjhauta Express blast and has taken the help of Misbah-ull-Islam
Abdul Razak on 19.09.2008 and said Abdul Razak was out on bail at the
time of blast in the Samjhauta Express train, however, said Abdul Razak
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Sanjay Kumar and again NIA has not interrogated this suspect during its
investigations and all these vital facts prima facie reflect that investigation
of the NIA is tainted one and apparently seems to have been done with
Bagli Forest area has nothing to do with the present occurrence, even if
though denied vehemently) and the same has again remained totally
investigating agency has led the case nowhere and the prosecution has
submitted that prosecution cannot derive any advantage out of FSL report
lifted after about 6-7 years from an open place which experiences heavy
rain fall every year and is accessible to all and thus any such evidence is
man that alleged residues of bomb blast could be found from open place
after 6-7 years and therefore in such circumstances, FSL report does not
submitted that even otherwise the prosecution has not been able to
establish that sand samples, which is stated to have been taken from Bagli
Forest area, remained in sealed and intact condition till it was analyzed by
with the charge-sheet. It is also pointed out that memo Ex.PW151/4 does
not make mention that any seal was affixed on the envelope of the said
sample is a farce and renders the whole process inadmissible and found to
Mohd. Irshad has not supported the prosecution case and in fact it has
come out in his statement that he had signed the document at Airport after
return from Bagli, thereby reflecting that going to Bagli Forest area was a
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
said samples were kept for about two months i.e. during the period from
after six months, RDX turns into Nitrite and is not found in the shape of
RDX and after explosion, RDX turns in carbon and is found in soil in the
fate, TNT degrades the most rapidly, followed by RDX and HMX and all
RDX in the alleged sand samples collected from Bagli Forest area and it
whether scientific or not and that too with a totally irrelevant piece of
evidence. It is also argued that FSL reports nowhere mentioned that traces
of RDX in sand samples collected from Bagli Forest area had any
happened in Bagli Forest area in the year 2006 and the sand samples were
allegedly taken in December 2012 and the site had hill slope from where
samples were allegedly taken from a pit alleged to be created at the time
of training at the place and it is again highly improbable that any pit
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
when the place is a hill slope and open area and due to the soil erosion,
the pit must have been filled with the other sand and soil erosion and
weather wear and tear must have also played their part in changing the
Delhi and from Delhi to Indore via Jaipur and again the case of the
collected and not brought on record any such CCTV footage and thus, the
best evidence has been withheld by the prosecution and adverse inference
his false implication is writ large. It is also submitted that as per statement
of PW-90 Istkaar Ali, after about 10 minutes of the start of the journey of
the train, the train stopped and somebody had stated that some persons
had got down, but again there is no investigation on this aspect and this
is also submitted that prosecution has not brought any evidence pertaining
against these accused are concerned. It is also argued that prosecution has
further failed to make out that accused Rajender Chaudhary and Kamal
qua these accused to that effect and none of the prosecution witnesses
that effect. In this regard, it is pointed out that as per the testimony of
Jaiswal, the face of the accused was covered with monkey cap and none
of these witnesses had identified Kamal Chauhan as the person who was
produced by NIA on that day and further these witnesses have admitted
that there were many voices in the CD and that they cannot say that which
words were stated by which person at the relevant time and in such
no role of these accused has been spelt out in any criminal conspiracy to
carry out bomb blast in Samjhauta Express train and further no overt act
has been attributed to these accused persons in the present crime in any
record and the same cannot be treated as substantive evidence qua these
not admissible u/s 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Finally, prayer
has been made to acquit the accused as the prosecution has failed to
1957 SC 637; Irsad Alam, son of Nurul Hoda Vs the State of Bihar,
Privy Council 253 (2); Govinda Pradhan and another Vs The State,
Das and others Vs The State, 1970 CRI.L.J. 906; Haricharan Kurmi
SCC 614; Ram Kishan Singh Vs Harmit Kaur and another, 1972
(2015) 7 SCC 178; Anvar P.V. Vs. P.K. Basheer and others, AIR
of Police and Anr. 2016 (1) R.Cr.D.226 (SC); Brijesh Mavi Vs.
State of NCT of Delhi, AIR 2012 SC 2657; Raj Kumar Singh alias
Vs. State of Bihar and Anr., 2016 (2) R.Cr.D.35 (SC); Kalam alias
21. I have heard learned Special PPs for the NIA, learned
defence counsels and have gone through the records of the case carefully.
Findings of Court
persons who were travelling in the said train and the aforesaid act of
persons who not only conspired amongst themselves but also abetted
other accused in the commission of said terrorist act and the accused
Section 120-B IPC, Section 302 read with 120-B IPC, Section 307 read
with 120-B IPC, Section 124-A read with 120-B IPC, Section 438 IPC
read with 120-B IPC, Section 440 IPC read with 120-B IPC, Sections
150(e), 151 & 153 of the Railways Act, 1989, Sections 3 & 4 of the
Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and under Sections 13, 15(1) r/w
coming on record and rival contentions, the following points arise for
train?
Section 302 read with 120-B IPC, Section 307 read with 120-
B IPC, Section 124-A read with 120-B IPC, Section 438 IPC
read with 120-B IPC, Section 440 IPC read with 120-B IPC,
Property Act, 1984 and under Sections 13, 15(1) r/w 16, 17,
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
(vi) Conclusions.
evidence to that effect. Even though accused have denied any knowledge
innocent persons lost their lives and many others suffered injuries, simple
witnesses. The criminal law was set into motion on the information of
PW-2 Ranjit Singh, the then PP Incharge who had sent a telephonic
GRP, Karnal. PW2 has deposed that in February 2007 he was posted as
messenger and received the information that bogie of Samjhauta train no.
4001 caught fire between Panipat and Diwana railway station. That on
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
alongwith other police official reached at the spot i.e. near village Siwah
which falls in between railway station Diwana and Panipat and there he
found that two coaches of the train, which caught fire, were already
separated by the railway officials from the rest of the coaches before their
arrival. In the meantime, ambulance and fire brigade also reached at the
spot. The injured were evacuated and sent to the hospital. Fire brigade
extinguished the fire of the coaches and thereafter, the dead bodies were
retrieved from the coaches with the help of the doctors and employees. He
P.S.GRP Karnal and the FIR Ex.PW1/2 was registered. He stated that the
photocopy of the said FIR in the record caseis Ex.PW2/3. Further stated
that as per direction of the SHO, he went to Civil Hospital Panipat for
bodies no.14 and 26 by Inspector Taken Raj and SI Sher Jang. He has
dead body no.26. Further stated that he was also associated in the inquest
ASI Hori Lal. In his presence, DNA samples of the dead body no.4, 48
record FIR book as Ex.PW1/1 and the FIR No.28 dated 19.2.2007
original daily dairy register Ex.PW1/3 of P.S. GRP Karnal for the period
from 18.1.2007 to 3.3.2007 which contains the entry DDR No. 26 dated
Singh, PP GRP Panipat, which was recorded in the said register. Further,
19.02.2007 he was posted as SHO in GRP, Karnal. ASI Ranjit Singh had
given the intimation to him that two boggies of Attari Express had caught
Magistrate, CJM, Panipat, S.P., Railways, Ambala, S.P., Panipat and also
Maha Singh, HC Ram Kumar other officials of GRP reached the spot at
about 4.00 a.m. On reaching there, he noticed that two boggies of the train
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Further stated that he also inspected the site of occurrence and prepared
rough site plan Ex.PW195/1, which is in his hand and the same bears his
Ranjeet Singh, FIR Ex.PW1/2 was registered by him under his signatures
Singh has deposed that on 19.02.2007 he was posted in GRP Karnal. ASI
Ranjit Singh had given the intimation with SHO Rajinder Singh that two
bogies of Attari Ex-Press had caught fire in between the Railway Station,
Singh and other officials of GRP reached the spot at about 4.00 a.m. On
reaching there, he noticed that two bogies of the train were burning and
fire brigade officials were trying to extinguish the fire. The officials of
Civil administration, besides the villagers of the nearby, were also present
there. After SHO Rajinder Singh first made arrangements to send the
the inspection of the spot was carried out. FSL team also arrived and
carried out the inspection. The FSL officials inspected the bogie
No.19054 and 19113 and after carrying out the inspection with their
instruments and dogs squad, handed over above-said bogies to him. Anti
Rajinder Singh SHO lifted three samples of burnt (ash) from bogie
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Ex.MO/42 which are the same which were lifted vide seizure memo
SHO as he has seen him signing and writing, being his subordinate
officer. Similarly, vide Ex.PW194/3, three ash samples were lifted from
are the same which were lifted vide seizure memo Ex.PW194/3.
of two live bombs, which were lying in the track of the train, with the help
of instruments. An attachie case was also lying and near to it, some
pieces of thermocol, cotton, oil bottles, timer, wire which was found in the
attachie case were lying. Another material lying nearby was seized vide
articles Ex.A to Ex.K and articles 2 to 11 which were found and seized by
Rajinder Singh, SHO from the spot. Thereafter, one attachie case lying in
bogie No.19113 of the train was taken out by the Anti Sobatage team for
its disposal and said attachie case was taken out in the open. The Anti
by Rajinder Singh, SHO who lifted the same vide seizure memo
the same which were lifted by the SHO from the spot. Thereafter, SHO
Rajinder Singh had taken into possession the residue of the attachie case
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
the article Ex.MO/49 which is the same which was lifted from the spot.
Thereafter, SHO Rajinder Singh had taken into possession the caps of the
bottles, which were affixed with M-seal, from bogie No.GS-03431, vide
seizure memo Ex.PW194/7, which bears his signature at point A and that
Ex.MO/39 which is the same which was lifted by Shri Rajinder Singh, the
burnt material from the bogies beneath the bogie No.03431 and 14857
vide seizure memo Ex.PW194/8 which bears his signature at point A and
article Ex.MO/49 which is the same which was lifted by Rajinder Singh
the plastic bottles, M-seal etc. vide seizure memo Ex.PW194/9. He has
seen the articles, i.e. 13 bottles, which are the same which were lifted vide
Ex. Article PW194/9-A which bears his signature at point A and that of
the investigation with Gurdeep Singh Inspector CIA, who had taken into
Ex.MO/38 i.e. burnt pistol along-with burnt cartridges and the magazine
which were seized vide seizure memo. On the same day i.e. 20.02.2007
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
from the bogie No.03431 and 14857 and were taken into possession vide
information from the control room of the office of S.P., GRP at Ambala
Cantt. that a running train i.e. Attari Express No. 4001 UP, caught fire in
the coaches between the Panipat Railway station and Diwana and many
casualties had taken place and also informed that he should reach the spot
with force. On receipt of this information, he alongwith his staff left the
CIA office after recording their departure in the daily diary register at
serial No.21. They reached the spot at about 4.30/5.00 a.m. and he found
doctors, ambulances and their staff, HAP, RPF, experts from the security
agencies etc. as well as FSL, Madhuban and other public persons, were
present there. Two coaches of the train bearing No. 14857 and 03431 were
burnt. The injured and the dead bodies were being shifted to civil
hospital, Panipat by Rajinder Singh, SHO, GRP, Karnal, with the help of
other police officials, doctors and public. At the spot, he saw that experts
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
lying near the track of the train and the another attachie which they had
lifted from the train at a distance and was blasted by the experts.
Thereafter, he went to the civil hospital, Panipat and helped the injured
and other police officials and assisted the other police officials in the
walky talky set from bogie No. 14857 and the same bears his signatures at
Point B and that of ASI Sahib Singh at Point A. He has seen the articles
Ex.MO/38 i.e. burnt pistol along-with burnt cartridges and the magazine
which were seized vide seizure memo. On the same day i.e. 20.02.2007,
he had taken into possession some currency notes Indian and Pakistani in
denomination and taken into possession from the bogie No.03431 and
14857 and were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW194/11,
which bears his signature at point B as well as that of ASI Sahib Singh at
iron pipe (Splinter), two iron sheets etc. in all 19 pieces of such articles.
Said memo bears his signatures at Point A and that of SI Mehtab Singh
and ASI Rakam Singh at Point B and C respectively. Rough site plan in
respect of aforesaid recovery was prepared by him at the spot and the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
pieces of suit cases from boggie No. 19113 which was standing on the
track at No. 4 towards Panipat Side. Said pieces were 11 in number and
appeared to be live suit case bomb IED No.1. Rough site plan
and the same bears his signature at point A.Vide seizure memo dated
of iron) and broken luggage carrier from coach No. GS03431. Rough site
spot and the same bears his signature at point A. Vide seizure memo dated
cartridges 9 mm and one round from the debris of the coach No.
GS14857, which was lying on the east side of the coach. Rough site plan,
and the same bears his signature at point A. He has seen Ex.MO-49, MO-
50, MO-51, MO-52, MO-38, MO-53, MO-194/11A and stated that said
above said seizure memos. Further, PW-86 ASI Suresh Kumar has
was present in his native village Siwah near Panipat and his house is
situated at a distance of about 150 yards from the railway track where the
out and found that a train was on fire and he immediately rushed to that
spot. On reaching there, he found that the train was on fire and thus he
tried to save the passengers who were crying for help while standing near
the doors and also tried to put off the fire. After that he came back to his
During this, he received a call from the Station Master that somebody is
throwing out something from the train. On this, he rushed back and found
that three bogies of the train were already detached from the train on fire
and further found that one person was sitting in a bogie and was having a
water bottle and snacks and when he asked him to board down from the
train, he stated that he will not come out. During this, he also found that
one broken briefcase was lying on the track and on checking, it was found
that it was containing some chemicals with a time clock. Being satisfied
that it can be a time bomb, he closed the suit case and informed the station
authorities that no train should be allowed to pass that place. After this, he
entered into one of the bogies where the said person was sitting and
confronted him about another suitcase lying near him and he alleged that
it belonged to him, but again said that the said suitcase was not of him,
but another suit case lying near to him belonged to him. That person was
under the influence of liquor and he asked him to talk in English. By that
time, GRP police reached there and he handed over that person alongwith
his belongings to the police. During his talks with that person, he came to
know that he was disclosing his name as Usmaan Ali and he was aged
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
the railway track was got blasted by the police, after taking it to away
from that place by bomb squad and the other suitcase was taken along by
the police. Thereafter, he left that place and he can identify that suitcase if
dark grey colour and stated that it is the same briefcase which was seen by
him at the spot and upper portion of the briefcase was lying inside the
train near to Usmaan, whereas the other half was lying on the railway
track having bomb like things fitted in the same with the help of
thermocol, which he has seen. This witness further stated that he had also
seen 8-10 plastic bottles lying scattered on the railway track, which were
intact and having some liquid in the same. The same were also taken into
possession by the police but no writing was done in his presence in this
and stated that these are the same bottles which were lying at the railway
was posted as MHC, PP, GRP, Panipat and that on 19.02.2007 SI Ranjit
Singh, SHO, P.S. GRP, Karnal deposited case property i.e. sealed
of the train, broken suit case, thermocol sheet, pieces of cotton, battery, 13
bottles, two covers of the size of suitcase out of which one was of blue
suitcase after getting the same blasted including iron pipe metallic part
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
mobile Sony Ericsson Model, some currency of India and Pak and other
Jars containing bones of dead bodies for DNA tests, as mentioned in detail
plastic Jars etc were handed over to ASI Ranjit Singh for depositing the
official handed over him the receipt after depositing the same at
were handed over to ASI Ranjit Singh vide RC No. 13 dated 27.03.2017
for depositing the same in CDFD, Hyderabad and said official handed
over him the receipt after depositing the same at Hyderabad. Further
explosive mixture etc. were handed over to HC Ved Parkash vide RC No.
14 dated 09.04.2007 for depositing the same at FSL, Madhuban and said
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
deposited case property with him, which he brought from FSL, Madhuban
with NIA camp office, Panchkula by sending the same through ASI Jeet
various articles of case property with NIA camp office, Panchkula through
staff who have duly proved that Samjhauta Express train started its
then smell of burning was felt and accordingly brakes were applied and
train was stopped as it had caught fire and train stopped at Gate No. 49
make roster with regard to allocation to their duties in the train. The
Samjhauta Express Train was already running from Delhi to Atari before
his joining in the year 2006, but he did not know when it was started for
the first time. On 18.2.2007 he was on duty at Delhi Railway Station and
was deputed as guard with train no. 4001 named as ‘Attari Express’ which
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
22:50 hours. Kiran Diwan was driver of the said train with his headquarter
at Amritsar. Sanjay Kumar was the assistant driver with the train on that
day. Three ticket examiners staff were also on duty on that train. The train
was already placed at platform no. 18, which is now renamed as platform
duty. His duty was allotted to him half an hour before the departure of the
train. In the year 2007, at that time, there was no security check of the
18.2.2007 the same procedure was adopted and there was no security
check of the passenger or anybody else before boarding the train. The
Duty Roster was always in writing and prepared one day in advance. He
from Delhi at right time i.e. 22:50 hours. The speed of the train was 110
KMPH, though it was running at the speed of 105 KMPH when it was
exchanged the proceeded signal with station master Diwana. He felt smell
of burning. He saw from his Guard brake van from both the sides and
noticed the flames from the coaches of the train. It was about 23:55 hours.
He applied pressure brake from the guard brake van and also spoke to
driver of the train through walkie talkie and informed that the train should
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
survey of the train and found fire in two coaches of the train i.e. 4 th and 5th
coach from the guard van. Then he intimated the control room at New
Delhi through ECP (Electric portable set for communication) and also
putting detonator at 600 meter and 1200 meter on the track to give
from the rest of train. He used fire extinguishers which were in guard van
with him and four extinguishers were also used by the driver in order to
extinguish fire on the burning coaches and in that process, his both hands
were burnt. He with help of TTs extended help to the injured persons and
got them admitted in the hospital. Thereafter, railways officer and civil
authorities of the area also reached at the spot and on their direction, the
train with 11 coaches, which were ahead of the burning coaches, were
who were in the last three coaches were also shifted to first 11 coaches
before the train proceeded for Ambala. The burnt coaches and three other
coaches behind it were left at the spot/site. He also proceeded with the
train to Ambala. The train was driven by the drivers who were already on
alongwith other two TTEs namely Rajesh Kumar and Lalit Kumar. He
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
train and he was put on duty on two coaches S-3 and S-4 whereas
remaining two were put on duty on other two coaches. There were some
unreserved coaches in the train also but they were not on duty on those
coolies and others such like relatives of the passenger could go to the
platform. GRP and RPF used to check the luggage etc. at the entrances of
the Railway Station. Reservation chart of the train was given to them by
about 22:50 hours and after about one hour the train stopped, he got down
from the train and saw there was smoke and fire in the backside of the
train and there was commotion also. He did not know as to how the fire
had broken in the train. He alongwith guard of the train gave first aid to
some of the minor injured passengers. Fire brigade and ambulance also
reached there after about one hour. Police removed the dead bodies from
the train. The train left that place at 02:50 hours and halted at railway
station, Ambala Cantt. The head count of the passengers was done at
Railway station Ambala and thereafter, the train started and stopped at
Further, PW-6 Vinod Kumar Gupta, Station Master has deposed that
Diwana from 20:00 hours to 24:00 hours till 19.2.2007 upto 08:00 hours.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
abovesaid train crossed railway station Diwana. He had taken the line
clearance signal from Panipat and in turn exchanged the alright signal
with the driver of the said train. The train was running at the speed of
about 108 KMPH. He was standing on the platform outside his office
when he exchanged signal with the driver of the train. When 9-10 coaches
of the train had passed him and from the last third coach, he noticed
flames of fire in one of the coach. He immediately shown red signal to the
guard of the train and rushed towards his office. By the red signal, he gave
indication to the guard to stop the train. From his office, from a Very High
Frequency walkies talkie set, he talked with the driver and informed him
about the fire in the train and to stop the train. He also gave the
change the signal from green to red to stop the train. Immediately
of gate no. 47 on the telephone that he had heard two sounds of explosion
when the train passed through the gate level of crossing no.47. He also
informed the station master Panipat about the incident and instructed him
not to give clearance to the said train to cross the station. He also sent
which was made by the guard of the train who had requested for
providing the first aid, ambulances and fire brigades at the spot.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
was posted as gateman at the railway crossing of gate no.47C which falls
duty at gate no.47C from 20:00 hours till 08:00 on 19.2.2007. The
Samjautha train bearing no.4001 Up, Attari Express crossed gate no.47-C
at about 23:52 hours. He was showing the green signal to the train at that
time. The train crossed the railway crossing in front of him and he heard
sounds of blast (Dhamaka). He noticed the flames in the coach of the train
from far away place, that may be 100-200 meters. The speed of the train
Asstt. Station Master, Diwana from his telephone from the gate that he
had heard two sounds of Dhamaka in the train. He remained at his duty on
Diwana. His duty was from 20:00 hours to 08:00 hours. The Samjatha
train no.4001 Up crossed the gate no.48-C at about 23:52 hours. When the
train was crossing, he noticed the fire in the 4 th or 5th coach from behind.
On noticing the fire in the train, he immediately gave red signal to the
driver of the train. The train passed over the gate no.48-C and thereafter,
fire in the train. In turn, ASM told him that he knows about the same.
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
His duty is related to the mechanical maintenance and cleaning of the rail
coaches of the train. On that day he was on duty from 22:00 hours to
06:00 hours till 18.2.2007. On that day, they had mechanically inspected
and carried out the cleaning of the coaches of the train bearing no. 4001,
Attari Express at Washing line no.20. After carrying out the mechanical
inspection and cleaning work of the coaches of the train, the coaches were
locked and the train alongwith coaches were handed over to their traffic
the train. Further, PW-10 Ashok Kumar, Gateman has deposed that on
18.2.2007 he was on duty from 20:00 hours to 08:00 hours on the next
day at Gate No. 49 which falls under railway station Diwana at about 12
O'clock, Samjhauta Express train no. 4001 Up came slowly and halted at
gate no. 49. He saw two coaches of train on fire. Said coaches halted in
the fire in two coaches. Thereafter, Guard of the train approached him and
asked him to bring fire extinguisher which he had brought from the
from his room. They tried to extinguish the fire by throwing water after
taking water from nearby pond but could not succeed. Further,
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
hours on the next day. The duty of Pointsman are to inspect the train, to
change the track of train and to give signal to the train to proceed further.
The Samjauta train no.4001 was crossed from Diwana station at 23:53
hours. He was on the offsite of the train at that time and was inspecting
the train while the train was passing the railway station Diwana and a
signal of through and through was given. He noticed that there was fire in
the train in about 8-9 coaches behind the engine. He immediately shouted
and tried to get the train stopped by showing red light signal carried by
him at that time. He also immediately informed the Asstt. Station Master
Diwana about the fire. The train stopped at gate no.49 at the distance of 2
Superintendent and they proceeded on foot towards gate no.49 where the
train was halted. On reaching there, he saw two coached of train on fire.
ASM had made a call through telephone to Suresh Kumar of GRP and
informed him to reach the place. Suresh Kumar of GRP reached there.
The villagers of near villages also reached the place of occurrence. They
detached the coaches of the train from the burning coaches from both the
sides. The driver of the train was also called and asked to give jerk to the
coaches of the train which were detached from the remaining train
other coaches for their safety. While he was passing the track through
away from railway lines. He noticed the suitcase while he was coming
back towards Panipat after getting the detached coaches stopped from the
bottles, some liquid came out and on smelling the same, foul smell of
look into the material. Suresh Kumar asked him to run away from that
place as the same appeared to be bomb and he ran away from that place,
cordoned off the area and stopped the villagers and people from going
Express alongwith driver Kiran Diwan. Being Assistant Driver, his duty
was to intimate about signal, informing about caution, blow the horn near
gate crossing and to carry out the instructions of the driver. On that day,
the train started from Old Delhi Railway Station at 22:50 hours. When the
on walkie talkie that the train should be stopped as the coaches caught
fired. The driver immediately applied the brakes and stopped the train.
The train stopped after passing Diwana Railway Station near KM no.
82/5. They put on the flasher light and secured the engine of the train.
They took fire extinguishers and rushed towards the burning coaches.
They operated the extinguishers and tried to control the fire. The driver
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
disconnected the coaches under fire. Thereafter, they again started the
train and started their journey at 02.50 hours to reach their destination.
Then train reached at Ambala and his duty was over and he left for his
2007 he was posted as Senior Crew Controller of the Loco Lobby, Delhi.
His duties were to depute the driver on the train and to provide and
supervisor the drivers and other staff of division and provide facility for
Diwan Driver and Sanjay Kumar Assistant Driver were deputed on duty
was not on duty as it was Sunday and it was his rest day. The duty roster
deputed as guard in train no. 4001 UP, Attari Express. The register is
guard duty roster register and verified the entry with regard to duty of
R.D.Singh at serial no.19 on Ex.PW3/1. Further stated that they also used
Railway Station wherein the entry with regard to all the trains are being
maintained. The departure of train 4001 from Old Delhi railway station
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Samjhauta Express No. 4001, SHO deputed all the police officials of
police station to reach at civil hospital, Panipat where the dead body were
SHO, he reached civil hospital, Panipat and was asked to conduct inquest
report of both dead bodies, being unknown. He further deposed that the
aged about 7-8 years as identified by Rana Shoukat and Ruksana Akhtar
wife of Rana Shoukat, who were also travelling in the same train, being
her parents on 23.02.2007 and their passport size photographs were also
affixed on the inquest report. The second dead body as referred in report
Bhai and Abdul Kadim on 22.02.2007 and their passport size photographs
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
were also taken by the photographer summoned at the spot. After these
handed over the proceedings to the MHC of GRP police. Likewise, PW-
Harnek Singh; PW-57 ASI Gulzar Singh; PW-58 Bir Singh, retired SI;
PW-59 Pala Singh, retired SI; PW-60 Hoshiar Singh, retired SI; PW-61
Jeet Singh, retired SI; PW-62 Surender Kumar, retired SI; PW-64 SI
Shish Ram; PW-65 SI Naresh Kumar; PW-66 ASI Dariya Singh; PW-67
Dass; PW-70 Gurnam Singh, retired SI; PW-71 SI Ramphal; PW-72 ESI
Ram Kumar; PW-73 ASI Ram Bachan; PW-74 ESI Kapoor Singh; PW-
75 ASI Subhash Chander; PW-76 ASI Tara Chand; PW-77 Hori Lal,
retired ASI; PW-78 Mahar Singh, retired SI; PW-79 Sher Jang Singh,
Singh, SI/SHO; PW-83 Snehi Raj, ASI and PW139 Inder Singh have
Express train on that night, about the death of Kashmir Singh. He was
also informed that the train Samjhauta Express had caught fire. On
the body of Kashmir Singh, ASI, RPF. He further deposed that jamatalashi
of deceased Kashmir Singh was also carried out and a gold ring, taken out
of the finger of deceased Kashmir Singh, was given to him vide memo
Ex.PW15/1. The dead body was handed over to him against receipt
Afaak Hussain; PW-93 Abdul Karim Khan; PW-94 Navi Mohd. Khan;
PW-95 Idrish; PW-96 Fayyaz; PW-97 Dharam Pal Singh; PW-98 Mohd.
102 Manish Sondhi; PW-103 Sukhdev Raj; PW-104 Nasir Ali Khan;
deceased persons were carried out and the cause of deaths is opined to be
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
body was brought by ASI Sukhbir Singh. Apart from mentioning external
appearance, it has also been stated that a jar with bones of lower limb in it
sealed with two seals were sent for DNA examination. Likewise, vide
allegedly due to burns and bone was sent for DNA examination. Further
& Ex.PW27/B in her evidence. Vide affidavit Ex.PW27/A, she has stated
unknown deceased female vide PMR Ex.PW27/1. Further stated that dead
body was brought by the police and bone (Sterum) was sent for DNA
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
female. Further it has been stated that in both the cases the cause of death,
in her opinion, was because of shock due to excessive burns and asphyxia
which is due to suffocation and all the injuries were antemortem in nature
unknown male child. The bodies were brought by ASI Hori Lal and HC
occurred on 19.02.2007 and left Clavicle bones were sent for DNA test.
Deep burns were present all over the body/abdominal wall. Further stated
that after conducting autopsy, he opined that cause of death was due to
shock, due to excessive burns and asphyxia due to suffocation. The burns
Likewise, PW-29, Dr. Alok Jain, SMO, PW-30 Dr. Dilip Singh Tanwar,
Medical Officer, PW-31 Dr. Bijender Singh, Medical Officer, PW-32 Dr.
G.L. Dhall, SMO, PW-33 Dr. Jagtar Singh, SMO, PW-34 Dr. Jai Kishore,
Dy. Civil Surgeon, Sonipat, PW-35 Dr. Lalit Kumar, SMO, PW-36 Dr.
Munish Pruthi, SMO, PW-37 Dr. R.K. Kataria, SMO, PW-38 Dr. Monika
Breta, Medical Officer, PW-40 Dr. Shashi Garg, Dy. Civil Surgeon, PW-
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Dr. Suresh Kumar, PW-44 Dr. Yogesh Goyal, Medical Officer, PW-45 Dr.
Rekha Verma, Medical Officer, PW-46 Dr. Ritu Gupta, Medical Officer,
General Hospital, PW-47 Dr. V.K. Tyagi, Medical Officer, PW-48 Dr. S.P.
Singhal, SMO, PW-49 Dr. Rajiv Sethi, Medical Officer (Retired), PW-50
Medical Officer and PW-52 Dr. Rajesh Kumar, Medical Officer, PW-63
4.00.a.m. On reaching there, Ms. Bharti Arora, S.P., GRPs was searching
bogies of the train and she asked him that the team should immediately
defuse two suit cases suspected of having some explosive device and
accordingly he alongwith his team reached at the spot where one broken
suit case was lying on the track and some plastic pet bottles filled with
some liquid were found scattered around the suit case. Similarly, another
suit case was lying in the standing position near the gate of the boggie No.
19113. Accordingly after examining both the suit cases and observing the
required procedure, both the suit cases were found containing improvised
both those devices as per the procedure mentioned in his report and after
doing the needful, all the components of the defused suit case IED No.1
and IED No.2 respectively mentioned in his report were handed over to
the Rajender Singh, SHO, GRP, Karnal with the advise to send all those
exhibits to send FSL after proper sealing and his report in this regard is
Ex.PW152/A, which contains all the details and procedure. Further PW-
and Director FSL, Panipat to reach Panipat, about the explosion in the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
(Ballistics) and Rajinder Singh, SSA (Photo), reached at the spot, which
was near the railway crossing of village Shiva (Panipat) and on reaching
Attari and said explosions were noticed by the gate man of railway station
station saw flames in two compartments and asked the guard and engine
driver on walky-talky for emergency stoppage of train and the train was
compartment No. 12 and 13 from engine side and some persons were also
accordingly he asked them to examine the spot with a view to give cause
he alongwith his team examined the spot and it was found that the
compartments were still on flames, but since the first concern was IEDs
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
scattered at the railway track and some bottles were also scattered and on
examination, it was found that all those articles were part of the IED and
glowing light at the handle of the suit case was shown by the police, lying
Accordingly, first of all they tried to defuse that live suit-case IED, lying
near the intact compartments, but it got fired during this process and then
the fire was over by that time and photographs of the burnt compartments
were taken and they were also examined from inside. Thereafter, those
railway station one by one by clearing all the burnt items lying in the
and identified and IED pieces were recovered (Cast iron pieces of pipe
bombs) from the both the spots. After that, dead bodies were also
also taken. Investigating officer was advised to send all the collected
items of the devices and burnt articles alongwith material handed over by
and handed over the same to the police and it contains all the detailed
observations about the scene of crime. The report also contains sketches
prepared by him and part of his report. Similarly, the sketch of the third
and developed in the laboratory are also part of the report and the same
letter No. 17609 dated 07.04.2007 (30 sealed parcels despatched vide RC
examination, seals on the all the sealed parcels were found intact and were
Ballistic division and on the basis of various tests and other reports of
into evidence and the Report(Opinion) Ex. PW154/D, further suggest use
30. Thus, the evidence on record makes it crystal clear that bomb
injuries to many others who were travelling in the said train and point no.
and thereafter he was produced in person before the said court only on
some other cases and when accused Aseemanand appeared before the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
some ulterior motives and had been preventing him from giving the true
facts to the Ld magistrate about the treatment being given to him by the
mentioned here that as per the defence, accused Asimanand also moved
order tomake retraction from his statement allegedly made under coercion
and the same was ordered to be forwarded to this court through concerned
jail authority and the application was received in this court on 20.04.2011.
Goundan Vs. State of Madras AIR 1958 SC 66 has held that in case
of retracted confession, the court has to take into consideration not only
the reasons given for making the confession or retracting it but the
Court has further observed that the view taken by that Court on more
occasions than one is that as a matter of prudence and caution which has
not necessarily mean that each and every circumstance mentioned in the
come from facts and circumstances discovered after the confession was
Pegu Vs. State of Assam (2004) 7 SCC 779 has held that retracted
voluntarily made by accused may not be wholly or partly true and truth of
further held that before acting on the confession, the court must be
satisfied that the procedural requirements laid down in sub sections (2) to
(4) of Section 164 Cr.P.C. are complied with as these are salutary
State of Tamil Nadu 1994 (2) RCR (Criminal) 731, while referring to
confession is retracted, the courts have held that apart from the statement
prudence namely requiring corroboration does not mean that each and
accused primarily on the basis of confession recorded u/s 164, the court
must apply double tests, i.e., (i) whether the confession was perfectly
the first test is sine qua non for its admissibility in evidence. If the
with the rest of the evidence and the surrounding circumstances, it may be
taken to have satisfied the second test. Further, Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Swaran Singh Rattan Singh Vs.
State of Punjab AIR 1957 SC 637 has held that usually courts require
Vs. State of West Bengal (2007)12 SCC 230, culled out the law
under:-
(iv) The value of retracted confession is now well known. The court
must be satisfied that the confession at the first instance is true and
relied).
while arriving at finding of guilt, would not ordinarily solely rely thereon
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Further the court must be satisfied that confession, at the first instance, is
also settled law that confession, though made voluntarily, may not be
where Sunil Joshi (since expired) and Bharat Bhai met him and Sunil
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
come within 2-4 days and after the programme of Shivratri, he came back
came to Shabridham and Sunil Joshi also came there and one boy Raj and
one Mehul were also there and Sunil Joshi told him separately that the
incident of Samjhauta Express had been done by their men and on his
Dange and his accomplice. That in the house of Bharat Bhai, Sandeep
Dange and Amit had disclosed about Samjhauta Express blast, therefore,
been done by these persons. It also comes out that accused Aseemanand in
his retracted confession has also given a version that accused Sunil Joshi
(who is no more in this world) had told him that Ajmer Dargah bomb blast
had been done by their men and on his asking, he (Sunil Joshi) perhaps
for some other reasons told that two Muslim boys were with them and on
his asking, Sunil Joshi told that Indresh had provided Muslim boys. It is
also revealed that this accused has stated that in December 2006, Sunil
Joshi came to him and told that Malegaon bomb blast had been done by
his men and despite repeated asking, he did not disclose much about the
telephonically called him and disclosed that Sunil Joshi had been
order to find out persons responsible for the murder because he (Colonel
Sunil Kulkarni and Colonel Purhohit told that perhaps there was some old
murder case against him (Sunil Joshi) and it might be case of revenge.
Thus it is nowhere made out that this accused had ever entertained any
carry out Samjhauta Express Train blast, meaning thereby that he has
Joshi came to meet him at Shabridham and Sunil Joshi told that SIM card
and pistol may be procured from Jharkhand and for the same, he wanted
to go to Jharkhand and that he demanded some money from him and that
he gave Rs. 25,000/- to him (Sunil Joshi), however this much statement
including the above-noted contents do not reveal that SIM Card or pistol
had been procured to carry out Samjhauta Express train blast and
moreover it is nowhere the case of the prosecution that any SIM card or
any pistol had been used in execution of the Samjhauta Express train
that the accused has primarily disclosed the facts which are stated to have
been disclosed to him by one Sunil Joshi (since deceased), which in turn
is attracted qua such accused. Thus, this accused has stated that Sunil
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
been done by his men and on his enquiry, he (Sunil Joshi) named one
statement qua him or any inculpatory statement qua other accused facing
the trial. Moreover, so far as statement against the accused facing trial qua
confession has found any corroboration from any other evidence coming
on record and this aspect has been discussed in detail in later part of this
judgment.
agencies during his long police custody. It is pointed out that accused
police custody till next day i.e. 24.12.2010 and thereafter he was further
out that accused Aseemanand was produced before Special NIA Court at
Special NIA court and Investigating Officer had not even informed said
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Further pointed out that Investigating Officer had also not taken any
permission from the remanding court to produce the accused for recording
his statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. before learned C.J.M., Panchkula and once
the designated court had remanded the accused to judicial custody, then it
was the duty of the Investigating Officer to hand over the accused to
Officer moved an application before Ld. CJM Panchkula for recording his
statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. and moreover the application was not even
signed by the accused, which itself creates reasonable doubt about the
apparently reflects that the statement of the accused was not voluntary
recording of the statement further reveal that no direction was given to jail
authorities by the then C.J.M., Panchkula to the effect that statement u/s
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Central Jail, Ambala till his statement is recorded. Further pointed out that
was handed over to NIA officials on 13.01.2011 and after recording his
officials, which clearly reflects that accused was not given any time to
come out of the influence/shadow and pressure of the NIA officials and
from this, same is also not proved to be true because the facts mentioned
record. It is also submitted that accused has not shown his own
given merely 10 minutes time for reflection when he was produced by the
NIA officials and the same cannot be said to be sufficient time for
reflection in view of the fact that he was in custody of NIA for more than
20 days in the present case and for many days in the custody of CBI prior
to that and as such, this much time was not sufficient for the accused to
come out of the influence /pressure/coercion exerted upon him during his
such long police custody. It is also submitted that during the first remand
agency and during the next spell of police remand from 03.01.2011 to
06.01.2011 and one disclosure memo and three pointing out memos along
with respective site plans were prepared and no other evidence was
pressurising the accused to make statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. as per their
court that his statement was not voluntary and that he was forced to make
confessional statement by the NIA officials and has made retraction from
his statement and retraction at the earliest opportunity further proves that
upon. After analyzing the entire records, the aforesaid submissions of the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
in the present case for about 20 days prior to 13.01.2011 and he had also
innocent and has been falsely implicated, which in turn reflects that he
statement. Further it is also matter of record that after sending the said
Panchkula, accused Aseemanand was produced before that court for the
coerced to make statement dated 15.01.2011. It has also been pointed out
PW224/D-A before learned C.J.M., Ajmer and made a prayer for sending
the said application to the court at Panchkula and the same was ordered to
be sent through concerned jail authority and the same was forwarded to
Thus, all these facts are to be considered and become relevant to make
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
accused Aseemanand and also reasons for retracting from such statement
by the said accused. At this stage, it may also be pertinent to refer to the
had not inquired from the accused since how long he was in police
custody prior to 13.01.2011 and did not ask the accused whether he was in
police remand at the time when he was produced before him. He has
further stated that on 13.01.2011 the custody of the accused was handed
over to the NIA authorities for lodging him in Central Jail, Ambala and
that he had not summoned the jail authorities to hand over the custody of
the accused to them in his presence. Further stated that it has nowhere
the custody of the accused was granted to the NIA authorities by the NIA
before him, then he will not be handed over to the NIA authorities again.
custody to NIA authorities, whether there was any member of the jail
authorities present or not. Further stated that NIA authorities did not
reveal the fact of the accused earlier being in CBI custody in some other
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
other case.
Magistrate and also in the light of the fact that said accused retracted from
his statement at the earliest opportunity and in view of the reasons given
Court in Parmanand Pegu (supra) case has held that before acting on a
Court must be satisfied first that the procedural requirements laid down in
sub-sections (2) to (4) are complied with. These are salutary safeguards to
ensure that the confession is made voluntarily by the accused after being
satisfied, but that is not the end of the matter. The Court, called upon to
consider the evidence against the accused, should still see whether there
are any circumstances appearing from the record which may cast a doubt
doing so, the Court should bear in mind, the principle enunciated in Pyare
Lal v. State of Rajasthan [(1963) Supp.1 SCR 689] that under Section 24
down. To put it in other words, "on the evidence and the circumstances in
a particular case it may appear to the Court that there was a threat,
confession is long but rambling one, which could have been pieced
together only after some sort of tutoring. Still further, since retracted
therefore, very truthfulness of the statement also comes under cloud. Twin
true and trustworthy, are sine qua non for relying upon confessional
voluntary nature and truthfulness of the statement, then very basis of such
the entire confessional statement, then the same cannot be used to convict
other co-accused persons who are being tried jointly with such maker of
upon Bhuboni Sahu Vs The King, AIR 1947 PC 257. A person may
have knowledge that conspiracy was being hatched, but the person could
not be held liable for the acts of actual conspirators unless there is a
of Punjab, AIR 1952 SC 159 has also held that confession can only be
40. Further, the prosecution has also sought to strengthen its case
In this regard, prosecution sought to rely upon two witnesses i.e. PW-141
Ajay Chauhan and PW-142 Shakti Singh, however none of the said
associated with Congress party nor has any political link with senior
leaders of Congress party and he did not know whether there is any
know any person by the name of Swami Brahmanand. Further stated that
he did not know any person by the name of Swami Onkaranand nor he
learned SPP for the NIA with the leave of the court, but nothing
142/Shakti Singh has stated that he never met any person named Swami
as he never met any such person there. Likewise, with the leave of the
court, this witness was also cross-examined by learned SPP for NIA, but
prosecution case. Further, prosecution also sought to make out some sort
him regarding his involvement in the present crime. PW-153 has simply
stated that he came to know from the newspaper etc. that Aseemanand had
Masjid blast, Samjhauta Express train blast and Ajmer Dargah blast case,
before a court and thus it is nowhe re made out that accused Aseemanand
relevant time i.e. from October, 2010 to January 2011, but very strangely,
during the said period has been brought on record. Still further, this
was kept alone in one cell, meaning thereby that accused Aseemanand
witness (even if it is assumed that said witness was confined in said jail
during the relevant time) had any occasion to interact with accused
statement of this witness itself, he was having a shady past and was
lend credence to the case set up by it. It is the case of the prosecution that
and Balpur Mandir where various conspiracy meetings were held relating
were also prepared at the spot and accordingly, learned SPPs for NIA
neither any recovery was effected nor any new fact was discovered in
pursuance to the said disclosure statement and it is settled law that Section
the Indian Evidence Ac, 1872 is inadmissible because the fact which has
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
mentioned in the statement of Bharat Bhai recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. Thus,
once names of all these three places are found mentioned in the statement
as per law and the same cannot be held to be lending any kind of
Mahendra M. Vankar and PW-157 Nagin Bhai Lala Bhai Patel, who were
accused Aseemanand, have not fully supported the prosecution case and
this aspect further creates serious dent in the investigations done by the
investigating agency. Both these witnesses i.e. PW-156 & PW-157 have
stated that on 06.01.2011 they were called by the Collector of Daman and
asked to accompany Local Patwari who will show some land and they
have to prepare site plan of the same and that accordingly they reached
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
they took them to village Mogra Badi, District Valsad and then took them
to a house and there were 6-7 person including the officers and that they
cannot say who were they. Both these witnesses were cross-examined by
learned SPPs for the NIA, but during cross-examination, both these
witnesses have stated that they had signed the papers on the direction
both the witnesses stated that they had signed all these documents while
sitting in the Circuit House. Still further, it is relevant to note here that all
the places, allegedly pointed out by the accused, were in the State of
Gujarat and none of the places was situated in Daman and how accused
investigating agency.
Kamal Chauhan is alleged to have pointed out dormitory and other places
Kamal Chauhan, he led NIA team to Karni Singh shooting range and
pointed out the place where shooting practice took place in April 2006
disclosed that he can identify the places at Indore and Bagli forest area
recovery whatsoever has been effected from any of the aforesaid places in
agency and in this regard, Investigating Officer PW-224 Vishal Garg has
platform from where Samjhauta Express train started its journey was in
his knowledge from the very first day when he took over the
investigation. He has further admitted that for the first time, factum of
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
u/s 161 Cr.P.C. Ex.PW224/3 & Mark PW134/A during the course of
simply inadmissible. Thus, neither any new fact was discovered nor any
statements of this accused and again this much evidence is hit by Sections
mention here that two independent witnesses, namely, Partap Kumar and
Rajesh Sarvate are reflected to have been joined during investigation and
practice at Dr. Karni Singh shooting range is concerned, the same is not at
all proved as per law and moreover, this allegation does in any way
accused had underwent any kind of such training in said shooting range.
In this regard, prosecution has relied upon two witnesses i.e. PW-147
Deep Bhatia and PW-182 Charan Singh, JE. PW-182 Charan Singh, JE
shooting range to the NIA official, but no incriminating evidence qua role
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
matter of fact, PW-182 in his cross-examination has stated that he did not
and that one Manmeet Singh Goindi was Administrator at that time and he
had handed over the above said documents to him and he further handed
over the same to the NIA officials. Further, so far as evidence of PW-147
Deep Bhatia is concerned, he has not supported the prosecution case and
with the leave of the court, he was cross-examined by learned SPP for the
lend any support to the prosecution case. Further, irrelevancy of this much
evidence also comes forth prominently in the light of the fact that
statement of concerned witness i.e. PW-182 and PW-147, the said site
plan is of the existing position of Karni Singh shooting range which was
after demolishing old structure built in the year 1982 and old structure
was totally demolished and new structure was raised and thus, it comes
out that the site plan/sketch has nothing to do with the then state of affairs
2007 and it seems that investigating agency has gone over-board to build
a case even on the basis of documents which have no concern with the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
and does not lend any corroboration to the prosecution case. Further,
prosecution has also sought to make out that accused Rajender Choudhary
same, he led NIA team to Bagli forest area in Dewas district and
prepared at the spot and that two samples of earth/sand were collected
from Bagli forest area and the same samples were sent to CFSL, New
Delhi and vide CFSL report dated 15.04.2013 Ex.PA/FSL-2, one of the
explosive and accordingly, learned SPPs for NIA argued that this much
raised, this court is of the considered opinion that this much evidence does
not make out, even remotely, the involvement of the accused persons in
the present crime and prosecution version does not find any support from
this much evidence. First of all, it is worth mentioning here that accused
team to Bagli forest area and pointing out memo Ex.PW-215/8 and sketch
Ex.PW-215/9 are stated to have been prepared thereafter at the spot and
are stated to have been collected on 26.12.2012 i.e. after about 10 months
when accused Kamal Chauhan had allegedly led the NIA team to the
have been collected from a pit on hill top on 26.12.2012. However, PW-
has admitted that in the forest area where they visited, they noticed a pit
which was pointed out by Kamal Choudhan on 27.02.2012 and they did
not collect anything on that day and they did not collect sand from pit on
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
more-so when forest area is an open place accessible to all and is an open
area which is subjected to all kinds of wear and tear of weather. Therefore
collected sand samples were ever duly sealed and were kept intact by
depositing same in some Malkhana before sending the same to the CFSL
for examination. First of all, memo Ex.PW151/4 does not make mention
of any seal impression nor does it mention that any seal was affixed on the
evidence to make out that the sand samples remained intact till the same
Garg has nowhere stated that he deposited the same in the Malkhana and
to when the same were taken from Malkhana for further sending to the
CFSL. Further it may not be out of context to mention here that the
samples of sand/earth, which are stated to be taken from a pit in the Bagli
forest area in December 2012 regarding the alleged training of blast, but
the alleged training had allegedly taken place almost about 6-7 years prior
collected from hill slope which is an open area accessible to all and prone
to all kinds of weather wear and tear, soil erosion etc. Likewise,
witness PW-151 Mohd. Irshad has also not fully supported the
on the direction of higher authority and in the room, NIA officials were
making enquiries from the persons with muffled faces persons and he
and that he had signed the documents at Airport after return to the Airport,
meaning thereby that writing work was not done at the spot, as alleged by
the prosecution.
46. Further, learned SPPs for the NIA have also sought to lend
especially after arrest of accused Lokesh Sharma and that this is further
about their involvement in the crime. However, again this court finds no
merit in the said argument simply because there is not an iota of evidence
on record to make out that either of these two accused had ever absconded
after the occurrence. First of all, so far as case of accused Kamal Chauhan
is concerned, none of the relied upon prosecution witnesses has stated that
accused Kamal Chauhan ever absconded prior to his arrest in this case.
PW-166 Kismat Chauhan have not supported the prosecution case in any
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
learned SPP for the NIA, but nothing substantial could be elicited in
by the defence, has stated that they had jointly sold the agricultural land
because the land was not fertile and thereafter they purchased a piece of
land adjoining to other fields. He has further stated that his Uncle
Rameshwar has three daughters and two sons and his Uncle’s youngest
daughter namely Lanka was got married on 17.02.2007 and his Uncle's
son namely Ram was also got married on 19.02.2007 and Kamal Chauhan
had attended both the said marriages and he was active member of the
family who was managing all the affairs of both the marriages and he
making out that the prosecution admitted the version of this witness as per
Further, PW-172 Shiv Narayan, who had purchased some land vide sale
by the defence that Kamal Chauhan never absconded from the village and
accused Kamal Chauhan never absconded from the village and he used to
Chauhan purchased another piece of land in the same village out of the
sale consideration amount which he received after selling the land and
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
prosecution itself has also produced on record two sale deeds i.e. sale
Jitendra Choudhary has not supported the prosecution case and he was
even cross-examined by learned SPP for the NIA, but nothing substantial
wrestler in the area of Depalpur and also knows his son Rajender
Choudhary who is also wrestler and police did not ask about the
31.08.2012, Rajender Chaudhary was not present at his house, but he had
seen him prior to 31.08.2012 in wresting bout about 10-15 days ago in the
witness has stated that he is active member of Congress party and had
further stated that usually the bouts of wresting were played by Rajender
Chaudhary in the area of Depalpur after every about 10-15 days prior to
Chaudhary in the Akharas almost each and every day. Likewise, PW-181
he had seen him prior to 31.08.2012 in a wrestling about 10-15 days ago,
and PW-181 were sought to be re-examined by learned SPPs for the NIA
with the leave of the court. Further, two witnesses i..e PW-176 Narayan
Dass Ji and PW-214 Ram Sharan Dass have also been examined, but
again none of these witnesses has supported the prosecution case and with
the leave of the court both these witnesses were also cross-examined by
learned SPPs for the NIA, but again nothing substantial could be elicited
cross-examination by learned SPP for NIA, has stated that he has seen
accused Rajender Choudhary present in the court but he has never seen
Lakshman Dass. Likewise, PW-214 failed to identify the persons i.e. two
learned SPP for NIA, this witness, after seeing the accused, stated that he
Hakla, Lokesh Sharma etc are also alleged to have undergone training of
Sharma and Amit Hakla are alleged to have taken delivery of suit-case
old Delhi Railway Station; accused Kamal Chauhan, Amit @ Prince are
discovery of any new fact has been effected in pursuance to the said
disclosure statements and thus any such evidence does not come within
the exception carved out under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
new fact or leads to discovery of an unknown fact and the relevance under
is that facts in question would have remained unknown but for the
outcome of such information then only it would be evidence, but when the
fact has already been discovered then the evidence could not be lead in
and mere disclosure alone would not automatically lead to the conclusion
recovery thereof has been effected and no discovery of new fact has
emerged and therefore such disclosure memos and pointing out memos
Afsan Guru (2005) 11 SCC 600 has also held that discovery of fact
concrete. A plain mental fact without the discovery of physical object will
not come within the ambit of Section 27. It has further been held that
more than that. The discovery of fact arises by reason of the fact that the
(2002) 8 SCC 45 has observed that the words “so much of such
Clearly the extent of the information admissible must depend on the exact
observed as under:-
admissible the fact discovered must be relevant and must have been
was made.”
reached old Delhi Railway Station from Indore on 18.02.2007 and they
establish this fact. First of all, neither any proof in the shape of train
from Nizamuding Railway station to old Delhi Railway Station, has been
50. Not only this, prosecution has failed to collect and bring on
record any CCTV footage in order to lend credence to its story regarding
Railway Station premises but he did not recollect the places. Further this
witness, though states that some of the CCTVs which were covering the
places of incident were not functioning, but he could not tell which
cameras were functioning at that time. This much admission on the part of
because the best evidence in the shape of CCTV footages has been
rigorous examination, then some vital leads might have been obtained by
it in order to bring the real culprits to justice, but no such evidence has
been brought on record. Still further, one PW191/ M.S. Wadia in his
and dormitories for the year 2007 was disposed vide letter dated 4.5.2010,
entry in their own handwriting, were not disposed of and again this court
has not got an opportunity to look into a vital piece of evidence because
providing a vital clue about the involvement of real culprits. Still further,
has been brought on record to make out any such escape journey of these
accused from old Delhi Railway station to Jaipur by train and then to
Indore by bus and in the absence of any credible and admissible evidence,
this court cannot put stamp of approval to the version put forth by the
at/recovered from the place of occurrence and the said suitcase covers
were found to have been stitched by tailor master Iqbal Hussain of Indore
and the said suitcase covers were allegedly got procured by accused
Fakrudeen, being run under the name and style of M/s. M.K. Bag House,
him to stitch cloth covers of two briefcases having size of 22-24 inches
and accordingly he stitched the covers and while stitching he put the
marking this on the clothes for the purpose of identification and handed
over the bags to Fakrudeen. Later in the month of March 2007, a police
official from Haryana police came to the shop of Fakrudeen and after
enquiry, when they showed him a cover and photograph and after seeing
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
on that cover, it was the same cover which was stitched by him and his
statement was recorded by the police in this regard. Later on, he made
Magistrate also at Panipat and that it is the same statement which he had
identified both the bag covers of blue and grey colours as MO-15 and
MO-16 respectively and that these are the same covers which were
stitched by him and which were shown to him by the police. He also
identified the marking of word ‘Apollo 600’ on one of the bags of grey
colour, MO-16.He further deposed that he has also given his sample
sample handwriting MO-17 to MO-21 and these are the same sheets on
running a shop under the name and style of M/s. M.K.Bag in Maharaja
Complex, Indore for stitching bag covers etc. Another shop with the name
asked him to stitch a cover of that suitcase and also asked him to stitch
another cover of the same suitcase from the same blue coloured cloth but
from its reverse side. Accordingly he, after cutting the covers, handed
over the same to his Karigar Iqbal Hussain and he accordingly stitched the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
the covers. Since one of the cover was not stitched as required, he asked
Puran that if customer will not take that cover, he will take it back, but
later on Puran told him that customer took away both the covers. They
used to put identification marks on the cloth on the basis of model of the
suitcase. No mark was put on both these covers but another cover was
also taken by Puran, on which the mark ‘Apollo 600’ was mentioned by
them. At about 4th or 5th March 2007, Haryana police came to his shop
and purchased two bag covers of ‘Apollo 600 Model’ of suit case. Police
again came to his shop and shown him a suit case cover of blue colour
and on seeing it, he told the police that it is also stitched by him. He also
identified two suitcase covers of blue and grey colour as MO-15 and MO-
16. He also identified the cuttings MO-23 which was handed over by him
to the police, saying that it is the same cloth which was used to stitch the
suit case cover and police has taken the above cuttings in possession as
deposed that he also visited Panipat on the asking of police and his
made by him before the Magistrate and was signed by him after admitting
vide which he handed over the bill MO-24 to the police. Further, PW-110
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
style of M/s. Abhinandan bags in Kothari market, Indore, for the last
about 25 years. After the incident of bomb blast, police came to his shop
and enquired from him after showing some pieces of cloth of covers as to
covers were not shown to him. Puran, Viren Aggarwal and Huzefa were
working as his Salesmen at that time. He was not present at his shop
during the time when these covers were made as such, he knows nothing.
The witness was declared hostile on the request of learned Special PP for
the NIA and was cross-examined by Ld. Special PP and during his cross-
Dalbir Singh, DSP, Haryana came to his shop and had shown two covers
of attachie to him. Both the covers MO-15 and MO-16 were shown to the
witness and he deposed that he has seen both the covers, none of these
were shown to him by the police when it visited his shop. He has further
meters was taken into possession by the Haryana Police. He identified the
blue coloured cloth MO-25 and stated that it is the same cloth which was
handed over by him to the police when it visited his shop. Further stated
that vide memo Ex.PW110/2, he handed over to the police MO-26 which
is a writing on the pad of his shop alongwith the bill MO-27 vide which
the above cloth was purchased by him from Porwal Fabrics and signed the
shop by somebody and when the same were taken by those persons.
Further, PW-111 Puran Mal has deposed that in the year 2007 he was
working as Salesman in the shop of Zainudeen, being run under the name
and style of M/s. Abhinandan Bags Centre, Kothari Market, Indore and he
was doing this work since 2001. Viren Kumar Aggarwal and Huzefa who
was also nephew of Zainudeen were the other two persons working in the
above shop. In the month of Jan/Feb 2007 one customer came to their
shop alongwith a suitcase cover and asked him that he wanted a similar
selected blue colour cloth and another piece of cloth was shown to him by
getting the sample from the Fakrudeen's shop and then he ordered to make
two covers of those two clothes, one of blue colour from their shop and
the other Denim cloth was procured from Fakrudeen shop by him and
asked him to provide the same by the evening. Thereafter, he went to the
shop of Fakrudeen and asked him to prepare the covers as per the sample
of the covers. Thereafter, he collected the stitched covers from the shop of
Fakrudeen and handed over the same to the customer in the evening. Later
in the month of March 2007, Haryana police came to their shop and
showed some cover and asked him to identify the same and after seeing
them, he disclosed that he identified those covers and disclosed that the
same were prepared by them. This witness was further shown both the
covers, MO-15 and MO-16, but he did not remember whether these were
the same covers which were shown to him by the police or not but the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
blue colour Ex.MO-15 and Ex.MO-16 were the covers which were
recovered from the scene of crime and which were found to be same
covers which were stitched by Iqbal Hussain. Further, during the course of
as the suitcase covers were sent to FSL, Madhuban for examination and as
and cloth piece marked exhibit-23 were compared with the suitcase cover
clothes marked 1 (a) and 1 (b) and these were found similar in respect of
colour, design, physical and microscopic appearance and have the same
texture and this much evidence has made it crystal clear that suitcase
covers, which were recovered from the place of occurrence, were found to
have been stitched by tailor master Iqbal Hussain (PW-108) at M/s M.K.
Bag House, Indore. However, investigating agency, very strangely, has not
persons facing trial had in fact got the suitcase covers stitched at the said
shop and procured for using the same in the occurrence and thus
agency got conducted TIP during the course of investigation, the same
might have given some vital clue about real culprits involved in the
present crime. However, the same has not been done for the reasons best
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Kamal Chauhan before the media people/Press and that the same be taken
witnesses i.e. PW192 Ashwani Kaushal and PW193 Arpit Jaiswal, this
though prosecution has examined PW192 Ashwani Koshal who has stated
news of Samjhauta blast case and on that day NIA team had produced
accused Kamal Chauhan in court and the accused was being taken back
by the NIA officials after the court proceedings and many press reporters
were putting questions to the accused and that he was recording all the
proceedings on his video camera and the answers given by accused Kamal
Chauhan, which were not heard by him at the spot because of rush of
stated the same was recorded by him in video camera and was transferred
by him on the CD and that the CD Ex.PW192/1 was handed over by him
admitted that he had not given any certificate regarding preparation of the
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
the CD Ex.PW192/1 was handed over by him to the NIA officials. He has
further states that he cannot say that in photo shop the CD can be edited.
Further admitted that there are many voices in the CD and he cannot say
which words were stated by which of the person at the relevant time. Still
further this witness has stated that the person, who was produced by the
NIA officials in the court on the said day, was having his face covered
with a monkey cap and therefore he cannot identify him in the court. Still
further in his examination-in-chief this witness has also stated that apart
from the CDs prepared from his own video camera, the clippings/footage
of the other news channel were also used to be exchanged. Thus, this
much evidence of this witness nowhere makes out that accused Kamal
and the CD Ex.PW192/1 was displayed during his examination, but this
witness again in his cross-examination has admitted that he had not given
Further he has stated that there are many voices in the CD and he cannot
say which words were stated by which of the person at the relevant time
and this witness also failed to identify the accused in the court by stating
that the person who was produced by the NIA officials was having his
face cover with monkey cap. Thus, so far as any alleged extra-judicial
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
records (CDRs) of various mobile phones, it was revealed that Sunil Joshi
the instant case and submitted that call detail records of the telephone
Neither any call detail records (CDRs) of any mobile phone nor any other
examined two witnesses, namely, PW-203 Rajesh Mittal, SDE and PW-
witnesses does not lend any support to the prosecution case in any
manner. Neither dump data of tower of Kothari market area, Indore has
been proved on record nor any call details were furnished in the
remained untapped.
54. Further, it may also be pointed out here that prosecution has
examined one witness, namely, Istkaar Ali as PW-90 who has stated that
about 10 minutes, the train stopped somewhere for some time and
somebody was saying that some persons had got down from the general
coaches, meaning thereby that some suspects are stated to have de-
boarded the train after start of journey of the train. However, there is no
Express train and the accused had allegedly planted explosives in the train
at the platform of Old Delhi Railway Station and escaped then and there.
prosecution has examined PW-140 Aruna Thakur, who had brought entry
register of the guests who stayed at Gujrati Samaj Atithi Grah, Jaipur, and
stated that in the year 2005 she was working as Manager of the aforesaid
Atithi Grah and any guest staying in their Atithi Grah used to make entry
Manoj Singh stayed at their guest house and he made entries in the above
register at serial No. 7954 in her presence and signed the same and apart
from Manoj, six other persons were also with him and they stayed in one
room. However, this witness, in her cross-examination, has stated that she
identified any of the accused persons as the person who had ever stayed in
the said Atithi Ghar and thus, there is not an iota of evidence to make out
October/November, 2005.
56. It may also be pointed out here that as per statement of PW-
Singh visited the police post Panipat and examined the plastic bottles
which were recovered from the spot and that on 26.02.2007 he obtained
the report of finger print from Ram Singh, Inspector Finger Print Expert
and after return to the police post, he deposited the report and material i.e.
case property with MHC of the Malkhana Incharge. However, again, very
the NIA that such report of Finger Print Expert was got
accused so as to get vital clue about the use of plastic bottles in the
explosions carried out in Samjhauta Express train blast and again vital
untapped.
which fall within the ambit of Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, so
Lokesh Sharma in the present crime. Legal principle with regard to use of
credible and admissible evidence has come on record to make out guilt of
AIR 1968 Supreme Court 832 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that a
level than the evidence of accomplice because the latter is tested by cross-
was further held that although the confession may be taken into
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Act its value is extremely weak and there could be no conviction without
confession is a weak link against the maker and more so against a co-
accused. The expression 'the court may take into consideration such
Versus State of Bihar, (2005) 12 SCC 545 the Hon’ble Court held as
under:
is not necessary to call the confession in aid. But cases may arise
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
a conviction. In such an event the judge may call in aid the con-
thus fortify himself in believing what without the aid of the con-
accused, even though the same is relevant. The Hon’ble Supreme Court
in State through CBI Vs. Mahender Singh Dahiya 2011 (3) SCC
109 has observed that where case of the prosecution has been proved
beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of the material produced before the
Surinder Pal Jain Vs. Delhi Administration 1993 (3) RCR (Criminal) 195
and Tarseem Kumar Vs. Delhi Administration) (1994) Supp 3 SCC 367.
State of Bihar 1994 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1 has held that sometimes
a crime and therefore motive behind the crime is a relevant factor for
legal act with illegal means with a view to achieve that intention. In a case
affords added support to the finding of the court that the accused was
guilty for the offence charged with. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.S.
themselves and with the motive of avenging such jihadi terrorist attacks,
the accused had carried out Samjhauta Express train blasts. First of all,
prosecution has failed to bring on record any evidence to make out any
such motive on the part of accused facing the trial. Neither any oral nor
any documentary evidence has come on record making out any such
PW136/Dr. Ram Partap Singh, trying to make out that on one occasion
where lots of talks had taken place for organizing the Hindus and that
accused Aseemanand had stated that Hindus should also retaliate in the
same way to the jihadis who are attacking Hindus’ religious places. First
i.e. much after the occurrence of 18/19.02.2007 and therefore the same
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Aseemanand if shown to him and when learned SPPs asked the witness to
identify that person from the persons present in the court, this witness
even gone to the extent of stating that the person who was present there
(the meeting on 11.04.2008 at Bhopal) was a taller person and that said
person is not present in the court. Thus the evidence of this witness makes
it crystal clear that he was a got up witness of the prosecution and has
failed to identify the alleged person who had talked about retaliatory
attacks and thus there is not an iota of evidence on record to impute any
motive to any of the accused facing the trial. It is also interesting to note
here that even though PW136 Dr. Ram Partap Singh did not toe the line of
prosecution, but neither any leave of the court was taken nor he was cross-
examined by learned Special PPs for the NIA in order to contradict and
confront him with his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
and it is settled law that all circumstance must form a complete chain in
persons other than the accused. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a catena of
evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified only when all the
621 it has been laid down that where the case depends upon the
and bring the offences home beyond any reasonable doubt. Further, the
cence....".
lished and all the facts so established should be consistent only with
to show that within all human probability the act must have been
while dealing with circumstantial evidence, has held that onus was on the
prosecution to prove that the chain is complete and the infirmity of lacuna
concerned ‘must or should' and not ‘may be' established and the Hon’ble
complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all
none else;
should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but
(f) It cannot be said that prosecution must meet any and every hy-
ful it might be. Nor does it mean that prosecution evidence must be
adducing evidence beyond reasonable doubt. A few bits here and a few
canon of criminal jurisprudence that ‘fouler the crime higher the proof’
and mandate of law is that the prosecution has to prove the charges
there being any missing link and also pointing to the hypothesis that
except the accused none else had committed the crime. In the present
the accused, facing the trial, with the crime in question. There is not an
iota of evidence to make out any motive on the part of the accused to
Samjhauta Express train etc. and the entire prosecution case is found to
planning, execution etc. of/by the accused with regard to carrying out
fore-going discussion, the points Nos. (ii) to (v) are hereby decided
prove the charges framed against the accused, namely, Naba Kumar
persons for the charged offences. Therefore, all the accused persons facing
trial are entitled to be acquitted of the charges framed against them and
are hereby acquitted of all the charges framed against them. Bail/surety
required in any other case. Case property be disposed of as per rules after
65. I have to conclude this judgment with deep pain and anguish
law, the pain becomes more acute when perpetrators of heinous crime
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
has set in the investigating agencies which coin various terms law Muslim
and branding the entire community, caste or religion in the name of such
best interests of human kind to nip such tenancies in the bud lest we
supremacy over one other would engulf the planet. However, despite all
this, everything does not seem to be lost, because in the instant case
itself, as per evidence of PW23/HC Ram Dass, one ASI Kashmir Singh
instructed them to check the toilets, passengers’ goods and luggage and
beneath the seats and to check about the unclaimed articles also and they
accordingly checked the coaches and nothing was found as unclaimed and
the train started its journey at 2250 hours and the train stopped with jerks
alighted from the train and noticed some smoke coming from the train and
they were trying to contact ASI Kashmir Singh and Swaran Singh on
walkie-talkie but could not contact them and when they reached near the
burning coaches, they saw ASI Kashmir Singh and HC Tarsem Lal were
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
Kashmir Singh instructed them to take the injured passengers towards the
crossing gate and when they came back, they saw HC Tarsem Lal felling
down and they lifted and brought him to the crossing gate and HC Tarsem
Lal told them that Kashmir Singh had gone inside the coach to search for
the passengers and when they again went there, they found ASI Kashmir
Singh lying on the railway track which was adjoining to train and they
lifted ASI Kashmir Singh and brought him to the gate and they noticed
that there was no movement in the body. The aforesaid evidence make out
reflects that police personnel and armed forces personnel do not hesitate
even in making the supreme sacrifices in the line of their duties and such
personnel like ASI Kashmir Singh are the real heroes who deserve the
which keep all hopes of Utopian society afloat. Even though the
prosecution has miserably failed to connect the accused with the crime in
witnesses have turned hostile in the present matter and have not supported
the prosecution case. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, time and again, have
it is again high time we put in place some sound and workable witness
Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)
logical conclusion. Indian civilization, which is one of the oldest one, had
of its rich heritage and culture and therefore we need to remind ourselves
and the world at large the old Indian phrase expressed in ‘Vasudhaiva
in the court. Ahlmad is directed to give a note with red ink on the file in
this regard.
Note: -All the pages of the judgment have been checked and signed by
me.
(Jagdeep Singh)
Special Judge under
the NIA Act for the State of
Haryana at Panchkula.
UID No.: HR0125
Rajesh Chawla