STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. I.B. VYAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Application has been filed under section 397 read with section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the following main relief.

(2.) The facts of the present case are that C.R. No.216 of 1996 of Palanpur Police Station, State of Gujarat, for the offence under Section 17 of the NDPS Act came to be registered on a telephonic message on 30.4.1996 from the police control room, Palanpur, which contains the message that one unknown person from Pali (Rajasthan) has given information that one Sumersingh C.Rajpurohit deals in opium. He is staying in Hotel Lajwanti at Palanpur, along with the opium weighing 5 kgs., delivery of the opium is to be given in Palanpur. On receiving this information, the police visited Hotel Lajwanti at Palanpur. Thereupon the hotel owner verified the entries of the register regarding the person holding the guest house. It was disclosed that as per entry No.604 of the register, one Sumersingh Rajpurohit, resident of Vardhman Market, Pali, had checked in room No.305 at 21:40 hours on 29.4.1996. The said room was given to him by his father Shantilal. Thereafter, the police team went to room No.305 and opened the same. No person was found therein. It was learnt that on receiving the information about the raid, the occupant of the room had run away. Thereafter, search of the room was made in presence of Panchas. They found opium weighing 1 kg. 15 gms. The P.I. Mr. Vyas, under the instructions of Mr.Sanjiv Bhatt, D.S.P., Palanpur, went to Pali along with P.S.I., Rajendra Yagnik and other police constables. The accused Sumersingh was arrested in the intervening night of 2.5.1996 and 3.5.1996 from his house at Pali and brought to Palanpur. As per the information, he had come to Palanpur with 5 Kgs. Of opium and 1 kg. 15 gms. was recovered from room No.305 of Hotel Lajwanti. Further information was to be collected from the accused as to where he sold the remaining 4 kgs. of opium. Sumersingh was produced before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palanpur, on 4.5.1996 and prayed for grant of remand for 14 days. When Sumersingh was produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, the learned advocate on behalf of Sumersingh submitted that the accused is an advocate practising at Pali in the State of Rajasthan and he has been falsely arrested at the instance of the owner of the shop, which is in the possession of Sumersingh. It was also pointed out that a civil suit is going on between the owner of the shop and Sumersingh. It was also pointed out that the police is in collusion with the owner of the shop. However, the learned Magistrate granted remand for a period of seven days and directed that the accused shall be produced at 15:30 hours on 10.5.1996 before the Special Judge. 5th May was a holiday and on 6th an identification parade was arranged before the Executive Magistrate, Palanpur, at 16:30 hours. Sumersingh was not identified. The witnesses stated that the accused is not the person who checked in room No.305 on 29th April 1996. They had not seen the arrested person-Sumersingh earlier. In view of this, on the same day, the police submitted a report before the Special Judge, Palanpur, under Section 169 of the Code and prayed that Sumersingh be released. Mr.R.P.Vaghela, the Additional Sessions Judge did not pass any order thereon on 6th May 1996. On the same day, the accused also filed an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code. The learned Additional Sessions Judge enlarged Sumersingh on executing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- by order dated 8.5.1996. The order reads as follows:

(3.) In view of the aforesaid factual position, while considering two Special Criminal Application Nos.1203 of 1997 and 1309 of 1997, the judgment of which is reported in 1998(1) GLH 405, this Court (Coram : N.N.Mathur,J, as His Lordship then was) directed to conclude the investigation pertaining to the crime registered at Pali, Rajasthan. However, the crime registered at Palanpur Police Station, Gujarat remained uninvestigated althroughtout and therefore, present respondent No.1 and one of the co-accused involved in the offence i.e. Mr.R.R.Jain moved two Special Criminal Application Nos.1079 of 1998 and Special Criminal Application No.680 of 1999 before this Court which came to be heard and decided by this Court by judgment dated 3.4.2018 whereby this Court has rendered detailed judgment and observed in paragraph 23 as under.