LAWS(DLH)-2001-3-117

MADAN GOPAL MADAN BHAIYA Vs. STATE

Decided On March 16, 2001
MADAN GOPAL MADAN BHAIYA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF DELHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeks quashing of FIR No. 270/99 under Sections 186/353/307/34Indian Penal Code and Sections 25/27/54/59 Arms Act, registered with Police Station Chanakyapuri, New Delhi and the proceedings arising therefrom. A challan has already been filed on the basis of the aforesaid FIR and the proceedings are pending before the trial Court.

(2.) The facts relevant for disposal of this petition, briefly stated, are that on 23,7.1999 K.P. Singh, S.I, Anti-Robbery Cell of the Crime Branch received a secret in- formation that some dreaded criminals of U.P. would be coming to Ashoka Hotel, Chanakyapuri to Kidnap some traders for heavy ransom. On the basis of this informa- tion, a raiding party was organised, which was headed by one A.C.P. The police team reached Ashoka Hotel, Chanakyapuri at about 11.30 a.m. and took position, waiting for the criminals to come. At about 11.45 a.m. one Maruti Zen and one Opel Astra entered the hotel premises. The informer pointed out towards the vehicles and in- formed the S.I. that they were the criminals, who would not hesitate to open fire even on the police party. The police team found that there was a large crowd in the lobby and the porch and as such, it decided not to immediately confront the occupants of those two cars, who had entered the hotel after alighting from the cars. They started waiting for them. At about 12.15 p.m. , the persons (including the present petitioner) came out and got seated in their respective cars. According to the prosecution, the petitioner was sitting on the right side of the back seat of Opel Astra. When a Head Constable and a Constable gave a signal to these vehicles to stop, the petitioner al- legedly pointed his mouser towards the police party and his other colleague named Azad Singh, who was on the left seat in front portion of the car, took out his rifle and pointed the same at the police party. Another person whose name later transpired as Ram Pratap and was sitting along with the petitioner on the back seat exhorted the driver Mithu to run over the police officers. He thereupon tried to run over the police officers. In the meanwhile, driver of the Zen car started firing at the police party with his pistol. The police officers tried to stop his car by hitting it with their sticks. The police party tried to block road also by placing their Armada vehicle, but driver of the Zen car whose name later on came to be known as Sri Ram @ Sarja Pehlwan, fired shots at the driver of the Armada even. Under these circumstances, S.I. K.P. Singh with a view to protect his own life and lives of the other staff and in the interest of public safety, fired two shots with his service revolver towards driver of the Zen car, one of which hit the driver, who fell on the left side of the vehicle and thereafter his car hit a three-wheeler scooter, which was standing there. Four persons sitting in Opel Astra including the present petitioner came out of their car and by pointing their arms towards the police tried to escape, but were over-powered. The driver of Zen car was lying injured in his car and a pistol was found lying near his legs. He was taken to the hospital where he was declared dead. A pistol was recovered from Zen car with one live cartridge and one live cartridge magazine. A mouser was recovered from the pos- session of the petitioner, which had one bullet in its chamber with six additional bul- lets. Nine live cartridges were recovered from the bag also kept on the back seat of Opel Astra. One rifle with five live rounds was also recovered from co-accused of the petitioner. Recovered arms and ammunition were seized and sealed into parcels. A rukka was sent to the police station, on the basis of which an FIR was registered and after necessary investigations, a challan as aforesaid was filed against the petitioner and his other co-accused.

(3.) I have heard Mr. R.K. Anand, Senior Advocate on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Anil Soni, Standing Counsel for the State.