STATE OF M.P. Vs. SHYAMSUNDER TRIVEDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the fateful night, intervening 13th and 14th October, 1981, the uncivilised method of interrogation of a suspect took its toll and a fatal blow was inflicted on human dignity when custodial violence claimed yet another victim - Nathu Banjara. But for the vigilance of some members of the Bar of Rampura and the loud protestation of one of the residents of the village the crime could have gone unnoticed and unpunished.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case on 13th October, 1981 respondent No. 4 Rajaram, Head Constable and respondent No.5, Ganniuddin, constable brought one Nathu Banjara of village Dhabala Deval to police station Rampufa for interrogation as a suspect in a murder case. At the police station respondent No. 1 Shyam Sunder Trivedi, Sub -Inspector; respondent No. 3 Ram Naresh Shukla, Head Constable alongwith respondent Nos. 4 and 5 gave beating to Nathu Banjara and tortured him with the intention of extracting a confession of guilt from him in connection with the murder of one harijan woman of village Singharia Piparia. As a result of the extensive injuries caused to Nathu, he died in police custody at the police station Rampura. At about 2.00 p.m. on 14.10.1981, the dead body of the deceased Nathu was removed in a jeep, belonging to the fisheries department Rampura to the hospital for post -mortem examination with the ultimate object of cremating the deceased, as an 'unclaimed body', for which respondent No.1 had already initiated some steps. Some residents of the village including some members of the Bar of Rampura who had come to know about the torture of Nathu at the police station, kept a watch over the police station and on noticing the removal of the dead body of Nathu in the jeep, they followed the jeep and reached the hospital. The dead body was removed to the mortuary. The members of the bar and others requested Dr. Naraindas Neema PW 22 not to perform the autopsy till the arrival of higher authorities. Naib Tehsildar Rathore PW 10 who arrived at the hospital in the meanwhile got the mortuary locked and sealed at the insistence of the protestors. On telephonic information given to the District Magistrate about the protests at the hospital and the gathering of a large crowd, the Superintendent of Police and the additional District Magistrate PW 20 reached the hospital in the evening. A written report Ex. P/1 signed by some of the residents of Rampura was given to the District Magistrate who ordered the holding of a Magisterial enquiry into the matter. Shri Bhat PW 20, the Additional District Magistrate was appointed as the Enquiry Officer. He commenced an enquiry immediately and prepared the panchnama Ex. P/22 of the dead body and sent it for post mortem examination vide requisition memo Ex. P/6, which was also signed by respondent No.1 Shyamsunder Trivedi. The post Mortem examination was conducted by Dr. Mehta PW 7. The Doctor in the post -mortem report, Ex. P -7, noticed the following multiple injuries on the deceased : - -

(3.) WHEREAS S.I. Shyamsunder Trivedi, respondent No.1 was charged with offences under section 302/149, 147, 201, 342 and 218 IPC; respondent No.3 Ramnaresh Shukla respondent No. 4 Ram Pratap and respondent No. 5 Ganniuddin were charged with offences under section 147, 302/149 and 201 IPC, respondent Nos. 6 and 7 Ramesh Chander and Goverdhan were charged with offences under section 201 IPC only. After trial of the case, the First Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur acquitted all the respondents of all the charges vide his order dated 14.5.1983. The State of Madhya Pradesh went up in appeal against the order of acquittal dated 14.5.1983 to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. Vide its judgment dated 21.1.1987, the High Court set aside the acquittal of respondent No.1 Shyarnsunder Trivedi for offences punishable under section 218, 201 and 342 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years on each of the two counts under sections 218 and 201 IPC and six months rigorous imprisonment for the offence under section 342 IPC. The sentences were however, directed to run concurrently. His acquittal for the offence under section 302/149 and 147 IPC was, however maintained. Shyamsunder Trivedi, respondent No.1 filed a special leave petition challenging his conviction and sentence but the same was dismissed. A review petition field by him also failed. This appeal by special leave has been filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh questioning the acquittal of respondent No.1 for the offences under sections 302/149 IPC and 147 IPC and respondents 2 to 7 for the offences with which they were charged.