LAWS(GJH)-2013-11-128

LAXMIBEN HANUMANPRASAD CHANGLI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On November 21, 2013
Laxmiben Hanumanprasad Changli Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS group of matters arises from the judgment and order dated 22.06.2007 passed by the learned Additional Special Judge, Court No. 11, Ahmedabad City in POTA Case No. 1 of 2004. Criminal Appeal No. 1463 of 2007 has been preferred by the original accused nos. 5, 6 & 7 against the conviction recorded against them and the sentence imposed vide the impugned judgement dated 22.06.2007.

(2.) THE original accused nos. 1 to 8 had preferred discharge applications before the learned trial judge. Accused no. 2 came to be discharged vide order dated 28.12.2004 by Special Judge, POTA. The original accused nos. 1, 3 to 8 have been convicted and sentenced/acquitted as follows:

(3.) BROAD contours of the case which led to the criminal prosecution against the aforesaid accused are that CID, Crime Branch, Ahmedabad City had received information that as per the direction of ISI Agency, Karachi based Don Daud Ibrahim had planned a terrorist attack in Ahmedabad city and was to target BJP leaders. On 22.06.2003 , the then Joint Police Commissioner , Mr. PP Pandey of Crime Branch received information through reliable sources that two terrorists viz. Ganesh Khunte and Mahendra Jadav had arrived at Ahmedabad from Bombay Central prior to two days and that they are sharp shooters of Daud Ibrahim and Chhota Shakil; that they are allotted the task to assassinate the then Law Minister of Gujarat State, Late Shri Ashok Bhatt and M.L.A. Mr. Bharat Barot on the eve of Rathyatra procession on 01/07/2003 to strike the terror and anarchy in Rathyatra; that they have arms and ammunitions and other persons of Chhota Shakil would reach on the previous day of Rathyatra to help the sharp shooters and one Nasir made arrangement of logistics for sharp shooters and they are going at 2.30 a.m. to meet Nasir from Railway Station to Panchkuva. Therefore the then Joint Police Commissioner Mr. P.P. Pandey called Mr. D. G. Vanzara, Dy. Police Commissioner, Crime Branch, Mr. G.L. Singhal, Asst. Police Commissioner, Crime Branch, Police Inspector Mr. Tarun Barot, Police Inspector Mr. J.G. Parmar and complainant and conveyed the information received by him and also introduced the informant from whom he received information for targeting B.J.P. leaders and guided them to catch the sharp shooters.