UNION OF INDIA Vs. PRASHANT THAKURDAS RATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A direction given by the Additional Session Judge, Amravati, seized of Special Case No.5 of 1996 for offences under sections 29 r/w 8 (c) and 22 of the N. D. P. S. Act, in which the present respondents Nos. 1 to 3 are accused persons along with 2 others, on a complaint made by them about ill-treatment and harassment at the hands of the officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, to the District Magistrate of Amravati, for holding an identification parade to identify the officers responsible for ill-treatment, is impugned in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as well as under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The letter written by the learned Additional Sessions Judge to the District Magistrate on 14-12-1995, can be reproduced as follows :- " With reference to the above subject, a complaint of illtreatment is made before this Court by accused (1) Prashant Thakurdas Rathi (2) Kamal kishore Chaturbhuj Rathi and (3) Kantilal Durgadas Jogani, in the above mentioned crime at the hands of Intelligence and Central Excise and Customs Department Officers for making enquiries between the period from 23-11-95 to 28-11-95, while they were in their custody. I have recorded their statements and they have stated before this Court that if the officers are shown to them, they can identify them. Hence an identification parade in this respect is required to be held in the jail premises at Amravati. For this purpose, I request you to kindly depute some responsible S. D. M. or Executive Magistrate to hold identification parade, and submit his report to this Court accordingly within 15 days from the date of receipt of this letter, by your office. The officer appointed by you for this purpose will fix the date of identification parade and inform accordingly to the Superintendent, Central Excise, Amravati, for producing all officers concerned in the investigation of this case in the jail premises. As the allegations are against the officers of the Central Government, deputation of some senior or responsible officer to perform this identification parade is essential. " The said direction is sought to be quashed and set aside alleging it to be illegal. In order to appreciate the contentions advanced in this behalf, it is necessary to state few facts.

(2.) ACTING on intelligence developed over a period, the officers of the D. R. I. , Government of India, searched the factory run in the name and style of M/s Vineet Organic Private Ltd. , Amravati, engaged in the manufacture of Mathaquelone, a psychotropic substance on large scale. After complying with formalities and armed with search warrant, the officers of the department at Bombay Zonal Unit, along with officers of Central Excise, Amravati, came on 23-11-1995 to the said factory along with two panchas by explaining them the purpose. The manager by name Shri S. P. Sharma (accused No.2) was then present. On asking him whether any other responsible person concerned with the factory was present, the said Sharma told that Director of the company, Shri Prashant Rathi (accused No.1) has gone to Bombay for some work and is expected to travel by Indian Airlines flight on 23-11-1995 via Nagpur. After observing necessary compliance of sections 42 and 50 of the N. D. P. S. Act, search of the factory premises was taken. Initially, accused No.2- Sharma denied any psychotropic substances being stored in the premises, but on interrogation, admitted that no Mandrax tablets were manufactured at the premises but the factory was engaged in the manufacture of Methaqualone granules and that in various parts of the factory, Methaqualone granules were stored. He offered to point out the same. On search of the factory premises, 1215. 900 kgs. of Methaqualone granules were recovered from different parts of the premises. So also, large quantity of raw materials required for the manufacture of Methaqualone was also found. One built-in cupboard was found locked. On enquiry, said accused No.2- Sharma informed the officers that he was not in possession of the key thereof and as such it was broken open. A suit case containing Indian currency amounting to Rs. 4,42,450/- was found. It was then 6 p. m. and therefore, further search was suspended and undertaken on the next day, after taking necessary precautions to guard situation. On the next day, inventory of the goods was taken and amongst them raw materials, 1500 liters of semi-finished methaqualone in liquid form were also recovered. Necessary panchanama was drawn and articles were attached.

(3.) RESPONDENTS Nos. 1 and 2 Prashant Rathi and Kamal Kishore Rathi came to be arrested on 24-11-1995 at Bombay and they were produced before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bombay, on the same day. At that time, they made no complaint about the ill-treatment at the hands of DRI Officers. They were remanded to custody of the officers of the DRI for further investigation, with the direction to produce them before the Court at Amravati on or before 1-12-1995. Respondent No.3 was arrested on 26-11-1995 at Bombay and he was produced before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Holiday Court, Bombay. He also made no complaint of ill-treatment at that time and he was likewise remanded to the custody of the officers of DRI. with a direction to produce him before the Court at Amravati on or before 1-12-1995. Respondent No.3 thereafter moved Criminal Application before this Court on 28-11-1995 for grant of bail, on the ground of marriage of his son and the same was rejected.