The duty of the Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence and proceed with the trial to ensure justice in cases of custodial death.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner are aggrieved of and have challenged order dated 20.10.2013, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate (Munsiff), Rajouri (“Magistrate”) whereby cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 302 RPC was taken by the trial Court against the petitioners and directed their personal appearance for committal of the case, in terms of Section 205-D CrPC, for Sessions Trial.

2. Before adverting to the grounds of challenge urged by the petitioners to assail the impugned order, it would be apt to note facts, in brief, leading to the filing of this petition.

3. A complaint was lodged by respondent No.1, before Senior Superintendent of Police, Rajouri alleging therein harassment, beating and snatching of jewelry etc against her husband, namely, Prabh Dayal. On her complaint, SSP Rajouri directed petitioner No.1 to call and present said Prabh Dayal before him. In compliance, petitioner No.1 deputed petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 on 12th February, 1995 to bring said Prabh Dayal in the Police Station so that he may be presented before the SSP Rajouri. As per the police, when the said Prabh Dayal was being brought to the Police Station in a bus, he alighted from the bus on the pretext to answer the call of nature, ran away and jumped into Nallah (Rajouri river) and attempted suicide. On this, FIR No.41/1995 came to be registered for commission of offence under Section 309 RPC. On next date the dead body of the said Prabh Dayal was recovered from the river at Muradpur. Investigation in the aforeosaid FIR was conducted by the police. During investigation, statements of Parveen Kumari, Vijay Kumar, Kamlesh Bali, Kuldeep Raj, Ravinder Kumar Sharma, Gagandeep Kour, Radha Kumari and Darshan Lal were recorded by the police. In view of death of the person who allegedly attempted suicide, closure report was filed on 13.06.1995, which was accepted by the competent Court of jurisdiction.

4. Aggrieved of the investigation into death of her husband, respondent No.1 filed a writ petition before this Court being OWP No.1129/2002 seeking fresh investigation into the killing of her husband through CBI or Crime Branch. This Court directed further investigation into the matter by an officer of or above the rank of Dy.SP. While these proceedings were pending, an enquiry under Section 176 CrPC was also conducted by District Magistrate, Rajouri. During enquiry by the District Magistrate, statements of Vijay Kumar, Parveen Kumari, Ravider Kumar Sharma, Kuldeep Raj, Smt. Kamlesh Bali, Smt. Gagandeep Kour, Nirmal Kour, S. Karam Singh, Om Parkash, Darshan Lal and Pritam Singh were recorded. The post-mortem report of the deceased Prabh Dayal was also considered by the District Magistrate who after analyzing the statements of witnesses recorded during enquiry and considering the other material, came to the conclusion that deceased died due to head injuries immediately after he jumped into the river, which resulted into comma. The District Magistrate in his report further held that there was no foul play.

5. In compliance to the order of this Court dated 10.03.2006, further investigation was carried out. By considering the report of the Board of Doctors dated 09.10.2004, Dy. Superintendent of Police went on spot and again recorded statements of the witnesses. The said officer, too, concluded that death of the deceased might have been caused due to the wounds on the head which might have occurred due to striking of his head on the stones. Accordingly, closure report was filed on 22.08.2006.

6. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajouri, suo motu called respondent No.1, Pushpa Devi and Kaushlya Devi and after recording their statements, referred the matter to the Dy. Inspector General of Police for carrying on further investigation. The Dy. Inspector General of Police constituted a Special Investigation Team comprising of Addl. SP, two Dy. SPs under the supervision of Senior Superintendent of Police. The SIT, after investigation, did not find any foul play