Death Sentence Ref. 2/2010 and Crl. A. 948/2010, Crl. M. (bail) 1121/2010. Case: 1. State, 2. Javed Ahmed Khan @ Chhota Javed Vs 1. Mohd. Naushad & Ors., 2. The State [Alongwith Crl. A. 949, 950 and 951/2010]. High Court of Delhi (India)
| Case Number | Death Sentence Ref. 2/2010 and Crl. A. 948/2010, Crl. M. (bail) 1121/2010 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Mr. Pawan Sharma, Standing Counsel (Crl), for the State with Mr. Harsh Prabhakar, Adv., Ms. Kamini Jaiswal with Mr. Abhimanue Shrestha, Adv. and Mr. K.K. Manan with Mr. Mustafa Arif, Advs. and For Respondents: Mr. K.K. Manan with Mr. Mustafa Arif, Advs. and Ms. Kamini Jaiswal with Mr. Abhimanue Shrestha, Advs. and Mr. Pawan ... |
| Judges | Mr. S. Ravindra Bhat and Mr. G.P. Mittal, JJ. |
| Issue | Arms Act 1959 - Section 25; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 157, 161, 162, 164, 167, 169, 311, 313, 368; Explosive Substances Act, 1908 - Section 5, 7; Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 10, 114, 145, 24, 27, 30, 32, 5, 8, 9; Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) - Sections 120A, 120B, 121, 121A, 122, 123, 302, 307, 411, 427, 436 |
| Judgement Date | November 22, 2012 |
| Court | High Court of Delhi (India) |
Judgment:
Mr. S. Ravindra Bhat, J.
1. These four appeals and one death reference arise out of a common judgment and order of learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 08-04-2010, whereby the Appellants viz. Naushad (A-3), Mirza Nissar Hussain @ Naza (A-5), Mohd. Ali Bhatt @ Killey (A-6), Javed Ahmed Khan (A-9) were convicted. A-3 was convicted under section 120-B, section 411 and section 302/ 307/ 436 read with section 120-B IPC. He was also convicted under Section 5 of the Explosives Substances Act. A-5 and A-6 were convicted under section 120-B, section 411 and section 302/ 307/ 436 read with section 120-B IPC. A-3, A-5 and A-6 were awarded death as also awarded further sentences under cognate for the lesser offences they were charged with. Javed (A-9) was convicted under section 120-B and section 302/ 307/ 436 read with section 120-B IPC and was awarded the sentence of imprisonment for life which was directed to run concurrently with sentences for lower offences and fine. All the appellants claimed to be aggrieved and have appealed to the Court against their convictions and sentences; since three of them have been awarded the death sentence, the learned Trial Court has referred the sentence for confirmation in terms of the provisions of Section 368 Cr.P.C.
I Brief outline of facts
Before an elaborate discussion of the evidence and documents presented before the Court, it would be necessary to recapitulate the salient facts. On 21.05.1996, a bomb blast took place in Central Market, Lajpat Nagar at 6.30 PM. This incident resulted in 13 deaths and 38 injuries, besides extensive loss to properties, both moveable and immoveable. PW-21 was the first to inform the Police Station about the incident; he witnessed the incident and reported to the police on the basis of which the FIR was lodged. Soon thereafter, investigation into the incident started. The same evening there were media reports that Jammu Kashmir Islamic Front (JKIF, in short) had claimed responsibility for the horrific event. The police traced the calls received by TV Channels-Zee News etc. The calls had emanated from two different telephone numbers in the Kashmir Valley. The Jammu Kashmir Police was intimated about these facts; and the police were provided with the two telephone numbers apparently used were i.e. 22315 and 33221; the first was registered in the name of A-1's (Farooq Ahmed Khan's) father and the second was installed in the house of A-2 (Farida Dar). Those two accused were arrested on 24.05.1996 by the J&K Police. The Delhi Police were intimated about this fact. Consequently, PW-49 Jasbir Malik formally arrested them on 25-5-1996 on behalf of the Delhi Police and brought them from Srinagar. The said two accused were produced before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House on 26-5-1996 and their remand was obtained.
2. The prosecution claimed that the Police obtained a break-through with the arrest of A-9 Javed on 01.06.1996 at Ahmedabad by the Gujrat Police. It was alleged that he made disclosure statement (produced before the Trial Court as Ex. PW-99/B). In the disclosure statement, he revealed the details of the various stages in which the explosives were brought into India and also revealed the names of the master mind behind the bomb blast, which included Bilal Ahmed Beg (A-11), Juber @ Mehrazuddin (A-12), Mohd. Ashraf Bhatt (A-14), Javed Kariwar @ Javed Ahmed Goojri (A-15), Ibrahim Abdul Razak Menan @ Muslaq @ Tiger Menon (A-16) and Daud Hassan Sheikh (A-17). A-11 to A-17 were declared proclaimed offenders; A-13, who was also a proclaimed offender during trial, admittedly died during the proceedings. On the basis of the information disclosed by A-9 Javed, the police claims to have verified certain facts from PW-13 Wazid Kasai during the investigation, as well as from Pappi (who deposed as PW-14) during the trial. It was also alleged that in the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., these two witnesses partially lent corroboration to Javed's disclosure statement vis-á-vis handing over of explosive materials by Javed to other conspirators which were ultimately used in the bombing incident of 21.05.1996. It was alleged that during the course of these statements, A-3's name cropped up as one of the key figures instrumental for the bomb blast. It is alleged that several unavailing attempts were made to nab Naushad; the police claims to have kept a watch near his house. Ultimately on 14.06.1996, upon the receipt of a tipoff, the police arrested Naushad (A-3) along with Mirza Iftekar (A-4) from the New Delhi Railway Station at 7:40 PM trying to board the Vaishali Express to Gorakhpur. The prosecution further alleged that on the basis of disclosure statements by A-3 Naushad, several vital incriminating materials in the form of explosives (2 slabs of RDX, 1 timer, 1 iron solder, 1 wire cutter, 2 araldite tubes, 1 gas cylinder and 1 detonator) were seized. Similarly recoveries of incriminating material were allegedly made at the behest of A-4. Both these recoveries were made on 15.06.1996.
3. The prosecution further alleged that on the basis of disclosure statements by said two accused, it obtained information regarding the whereabouts of other two accused i.e. Mirza Nissar Hussain, A-5 (hereafter referred to as 'Naza') and Mohd. Ali Bhatt, A-6 (hereafter referred to as 'Killey'). The police party apparently went to Gorakhpur on 16.06.1996. Killey and Latif Ahmed (A-7 who was ultimately acquitted by the impugned judgment after the trial) were arrested. It was also alleged that A-3 and A-4 had accompanied the police when the said two accused Killey and Latif were arrested on 16.06.1996. Allegedly, the latter two were identified and pointed out by A-3 and A-4. The police, on the basis of disclosure statement by Latif Ahmed (A-7) recovered a torn half of a two rupee note, which was a key to obtain funds for Naushad (A-3), from a hawala transaction from one Mangal Chand in Delhi. The prosecution alleged that on the basis of further information received on 17.06.1996 the police party went to Mussoorie and arrested A-5 Naza.
4. It was further alleged that on the basis of disclosure statements recorded by A-6 and A-7, a police party went to Shalimar Bagh, Delhi on 17.06.1996; the place was identified by the accused, from where a torn half two rupee note was recovered (at the behest of A-7) from Mangal Chand, who handed over Rupees one lakh in cash to A-4 to be given to A-3 (Naushad). The Seizure Memo in respect of the said money was prepared that day and later produced during the trial. The appellants claimed to have sent another party to Gorakhpur on 18.06.1996 to seize relevant extracts of the guest house records as well as the railway reservations chart dated 27.05.1996 (pertaining to Shaheed Express) to prove that Naushad had travelled from Gorakhpur to Delhi.
5. In the meanwhile, Javed (A-9) and Nikka (A-10) along with two others were detained in Ahmedabad. Javed, A-9 and Nikka, A-10 were transferred to Jaipur where they were needed in connection with another pending case involving trial for the offence punishable under Section 307, IPC. The prosecution case is that there was a bomb blast at Dausa, Rajasthan soon after bomb blast in Lajpat Nagar, Delhi. On 19.07.1996 the concerned Magistrate Bhagwan Das (PW-100) at Jaipur recorded a judicial confession of Javed, A-9 (Ex. PW-100/A) wherein Javed narrated the sequence of events which he was aware of, implicating various accused as well as identifying their roles. Apparently, A-9 and A-10 were kept in custody and eventually formally arrested by the Delhi Police on 26.07.1996.
6. The prosecution went on to investigate the matter further, obtained the opinion of various experts including explosives experts and after collecting all other materials filed the charge sheet against 10 accused who stood trial. All of them claimed they were not guilty. The prosecution relied on the testimonies of 107 witnesses and also several material exhibits which included seizure memo, pointing out memos, disclosure statements, confessional statements of A-9 (Ex. 100/A). After the statement on behalf of the accused, under Section 313, Cr PC was recorded, Naushad chose to lead evidence in defence and relied upon the testimonies of the two witnesses-Shri Mukesh, a Section Officer, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) DW-1 and Shri Arun Kumar Sharma, Public Relation Inspector DW-2.
7. After considering the statements on behalf of the parties and the materials placed before it, the Trial Court convicted the four appellants before this Court and acquitted A-4, A-7, A-8 and A-10 of the charges. A-1 and A-2 were convicted under Sections 5 and 7 of Explosive Act and were sentenced to undergo 7 years imprisonment.
8. Two accused Farooq Ahmed Khan A-1 and Farida Dar A-2 did not appeal against their conviction and sentence.
II Brief Summary of the Trial Court findings
9. The Trial Court convicted A-1 on the basis of recovery of articles, pursuant to his disclosure statement Ex. PW-39/B recorded on 04.06.1996 in Delhi. The prosecution witnesses relied upon by the Trial Court in this regard were PW-18 Inspector Pawan Kumar and PW-19 Prem Ballabh Dhayani, BSF Srinagar. They deposed that A-1 took them along with other police and BSF Personnel to his house at Janglat Mandi and pointed out to a safe which was locked. The lock was broken and one AK-56 and two magazines containing 59 rounds were recovered. Additionally, explosives weighing more than 1 kg were recovered from a polythene bag. These were seized under memo Ex. PW 18/A. The Trial Court also found that documents were seized and recorded in a memo Ex. PW 18/B. The documents recovered were produced as Ex. PW 19/1 to 19/8. The Trial Court also believed PW-22 SI Arvind Verma who accompanied PW 18 and 19 and searched A-1's house which led to seizure to documents Ex. A/1 to A/8. These documents pertained to installation of telephone (which was used...
To continue reading
Request your trial