Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Pankaj Bhandari, Sameer Jain, JJ.
Saifurrehman Ansari S/o Abdul Rehman Ansari and ors. - Appellants
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Public Prosecutor - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 208 & 250 of 2022
Decided On : 29-03-2023
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 302, 307, 326, 324, 427, 124-A, 153-A – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 162 - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Sections 3/10, 20, 38 - Explosive Substances Act, 1908 - Section 6 - Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act - Section 3 - An Email was received by TV Channels and News Agencies India TV and Aaj Tak by which Indian Mujaheedeen Organization took responsibility of serial bomb blasts - Along with Email, one video clip was also received, which pertained to bicycle and a bag on that bicycle - Bicycle with same frame number was seized from blast site near Police Station, Kotwali in a damaged condition in FIR No - Exactly 4 months after Jaipur blasts – Accused was arrested from flat - In disclosure statement, it was mentioned that all these 10 accused had come in groups to do reconnaissance “Reki” of places where they intended to plant bombs and returned on same day by Ajmer Shatabdi Train - It is contended that trial Court has rightly convicted accused appellants as they were involved in serial bomb blasts and their involvement in bomb blasts at different places is revealed from evidence adduced before Court. Para 13
Finding of Court :
Police/investigation agency is expected to perform their duty in a very cautious, sincere, devoted, diligent manner in accordance with law as per statutory mandate and in accordance with settled position of law - It is duty of police/investigation agency to secure and record complete evidence, to investigate in a sincere manner, to identify culprits/accused, frame charges and assist the prosecution - In instant case, investigation agency has utterly failed to do so - Court hold that Investigation Agency in given case should be made responsible/accountable for their negligent, cursory and inefficient actions - In given case, for reasons stated above, in spite of case being of heinous nature, 71 persons losing their lives and 185 persons sustaining injuries, causing unrest in lives of every citizen, not just in city , but all across country, Court deem it appropriate to direct Director General of Rajasthan Police to initiate appropriate Enquiry/Disciplinary Proceedings against erring officers of Investigating Team.
Result : Order Accordingly
JUDGMENT :
Pankaj Bhandari, J.
D.B. Criminal Appeal No.208/2022 & 250/2022:
1. Accused Mohammad Salman, Saifur @ Saifurrehman Ansari, Mohammad Saif @ Karain and Mohammad Sarvar Azmi @ Rajhans Yadav have preferred D.B. Criminal Appeal No.208/2022, aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 18.12.2019 and order of sentence dated 20.12.2019 passed by Special Judge, Jaipur Bomb Blast Cases, Jaipur in Sessions Case No.7/2010 – State Versus Shahbaz Hussain @ Shahbaz Ahmed @ Shanu & Ors., FIR No.132/2008, Police Station, Manak Chowk, Jaipur City (North), whereby accused Shahbaz Hussain was acquitted from the charges levelled against him and other accused Mohammad Salman, Saifurrehman Ansari, Mohammad Saif and Mohammad Sarvar Azmi were convicted and State of Rajasthan has also preferred D.B. Criminal Appeal No.250/2022 against the acquittal of Shahbaz Hussain @ Shahbaz Ahmed @ Shanu and for enhancement of sentence of other accused. Accused Mohammad Salman, Saifurrehman Ansari, Mohammad Saif and Mohammad Sarvar Azmi were acquitted from the charges under Sections 302, 307, 326, 324, 427, 124-A, 153-A of IPC, Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act read with Section 120-B IPC, Sections 4 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 read with Section 120-B IPC, Section 6 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908, Sections 3/10, 20, 38 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Accused Mohammad Salman, Saifurrehman Ansari, Mohammad Saif and Mohammad Sarvar Azmi have been convicted by the Court for the following offences:
Mohammad Salman, Saifurrehman Ansari, Mohammad Saif and Mohammad Sarvar Azmi:-
| Offence | Sentence | Fine | Sentence in default of fine |
| U/s 302/120-B, 307/120-B, 121-A, 124- A/120-B IPC, Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 r/w Section 120-B IPC | Life Imprisonment | Rs.50,000/- | 3 months |
| U/s 326/120-B IPC | 5 years R.I. | Rs.10,000/- | 3 months |
| U/s 324/120-B IPC | 3 years R.I. | Rs.5,000/- | 3 months |
| U/s 153-A/120-B IPC | 3 years R.I. | Rs.50,000/- | 3 months |
| U/s 13 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 | 7 years R.I. | Rs.50,000/- | 3 months |
| U/s 18 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 | Life Imprisonment | Rs.50,000/- | 3 months |
All sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that a spate of explosions took place in the crowded market, places of the walled pink city of Jaipur on Tuesday, May 13, 2008 within a short span of 20 minutes, resulting into death of 71 persons and injuries to 185 persons. In each of the blast sites, the bombs were planted on brand new bicycles, which were placed at carefully selected crowded market places near temples and police stations. In total 8 FIRs were registered, 4 FIRs were registered at Police Station Kotwali and 4 FIRS were registered at Police Station Manak Chowk.
3. The present appeals pertain to FIR No. 132/2008, Police Station Manak Chowk, Jaipur. The author of the FIR was Mohan Lal. The place of incidence of blast in this FIR is Peetliyon Ka Rasta, Jauhari Bazar. The total number of persons injured were 20 and those who died in the blast were 7.
4. On next day of the incident i.e. 14.05.2008, an Email was received by TV Channels and News Agencies India TV and Aaj Tak by which Indian Mujaheedeen Organization took the responsibility of serial bomb blasts in Jaipur. Along with the Email, one video clip was also received, which pertained to bicycle and a bag on that bicycle. In the first part of the Email, there is a mention about the bicycle with frame No.129489, which was placed near Police Station Kotwali at Chhoti Chaupad. The bicycle with the same frame number was seized from the blast site near Police Station, Kotwali in a damaged condition in FIR No.117/2007. Exactly 4 months after the Jaipur blasts i.e. on 13.09.2008, there were serial bomb
In view of Section 10 of the Evidence Act anything said, done or written by those who enlist their support to the object of conspiracy and those who join later or make their exit before completion of....
The prosecution must establish a conclusive chain of evidence for conviction based on circumstantial evidence; mere hearsay and lack of eyewitness testimony do not meet the burden of proof.
In cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and unbreakable chain of events to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
