Narayan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Narayan Lal vs State of Rajasthan and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Feb 21, 2006

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/757259

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/757259
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: Shiv Kumar Sharma and; R.S. Chauhan, JJ.
Decided On: Feb 21, 2006
Case Number: D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 1379 of 2006
Subject: Constitution

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- Section 2(k), 2(1), 7 & 40 & Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007, Rule 12 & 98 & Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, Section 2(h): [Altamas Kabir & Cyriac Joseph, JJ] Determination as to Juvenile - Appellant was found to have completed the age of 16 years and 13 days on the date of alleged oc...

Key legal issue: Constitution
Acts & sections: Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 379; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 102

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Narayan Lal

Advocate Ashvin Garg, Adv.

Respondent

State of Rajasthan and ors.

Advocate R.P. Kuldeep, Dy. Govt. Adv.

Legal References

Acts: Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 379; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 102
Reported In: RLW2006(3)Raj1749; 2006(3)WLC175

Excerpt

- section 2(k), 2(1), 7 & 40 & juvenile justice (care and protection of children) rules, 2007, rule 12 & 98 & juvenile justice act, 1986, section 2(h): [altamas kabir & cyriac joseph, jj] determination as to juvenile - appellant was found to have completed the age of 16 years and 13 days on the date of alleged occurrence - appellant was arrested on 30.11.1998 when the 1986 act was in force and under clause (h) of section 2 a juvenile was described to mean a child who had not attained the age of sixteen years or a girl who had not attained the age of eighteen years - it is with the enactment of the juvenile justice act, 2000, that in section 2(k) a juvenile or child was defined to mean a child who had not completed eighteen years of a ge which was given prospective prospect - appellant was about sixteen years of age on the date of commission of the alleged offence and had not completed eighteen years of age when the juvenile justice act, 2000, came into force - juvenile act, of 2000 has been given retrospective effect by rule 12 of juvenile justice rule, 2007 - as such, accused has to be treated as juvenile under the said act. - 5. having heard the submissions and on scrutiny of case diary, affidavits and statement of ramji lal, we are prima facie satisfied that police officials of police station shiv daspura have not acted fairly in detaining and torturing ramji lal in view of the fact that final report in the case registered under section 379 ipc had already been submitted by police station shiv daspura on december 8, 2005 before the concerned magistrate. we are satisfied that this case requires deep prob by an independent investigating agency. 5000/- and one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the deputy registrar (judicial) jaipur. 3, jaipur district jaipur as well as the superintendent, central jail, jaipur......heard the submissions and on scrutiny of case diary, affidavits and statement of ramji lal, we are prima facie satisfied that police officials of police station shiv daspura have not acted fairly in detaining and torturing ramji lal in view of the fact that final report in the case registered under section 379 ipc had already been submitted by police station shiv daspura on december 8, 2005 before the concerned magistrate. when ramji lal appeared before us in the court he was limping and even according to case diary the injuries sustained by ramji lal were examined twice and the said injuries were also shown in his arrest memo.6. torture in any form, for the purpose of investigation into crime is not justified. it is barbarous and inhuman. no police lifestyle which relies more on fists than on wits, on torture more than on culture can control crime because means boomerang on ends and refuel the vice which it seeks to extinguish. their lordships of supreme court in bhim singhv. state of j & k : 1986 crilj192 indicated that police officers who are the custodians of law and order should have the greatest respect for the personal liberty of citizens and should not flout the laws by stooping to bizarre acts of lawlessness. 7. it has shocked our judicial conscience that in a case under section 379 ipc, which is triable by first class magistrate and in which final report was submitted the bail application of ramji lal has been dismissed and he has been sent to judicial custody. we are satisfied that this case requires deep prob by an independent investigating agency.8. as a result of above discussion, we deem it appropriate to issue following directions:(1) the matter be inquired by the central bureau of investigation, which will submit its report within one month from today. the inquiry shall be made on the following points:(a) whether detenue ramji lal has been given beating at the police station shiv daspura. jaipur district, jaipur?(b) whether he was nabbed while he.....

Full Judgment

Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.

1. In this Habeas Corpus petition the petitioner has levelled allegations against the police officials of Police Station Shiv Daspura (Jaipur District) that they illegally detained Ramji Lal (son of the petitioner) and torturedhim. As per the facts averred in the petition, one Kumari Kamoj had been kidnapped on March 29, 2003 by Prabhu Dayal and Smt. Suman Saini, who were named as accused in the FIR No. 86/2003 lodged at Police Station Shiv Daspura.

2. It appears that after Ramjilal was detained the petitioner sent a telegram to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Jaipur seeking inquiry of illegal detention and torture of Ramji Lal by Police Station Shiv Daspura, but no heed was paid to it. Thereafter the petitioner has filed instant Habeas Corpus Petition.

3. In compliance of the notice issued in the matter Ramji Lal has been produced before us from the judicial custody, since by now he was arrested in a case bearing FIR No. 240/2005 registered under Section 379 IPC. It also appears that the application seeking bail was dismissed by learned Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Jaipur District.

4. We have directed Deputy Registrar (Judicial) to record the statement of Ramji Lal.

5. Having heard the submissions and on scrutiny of case diary, affidavits and statement of Ramji Lal, we are prima facie satisfied that police officials of Police Station Shiv Daspura have not acted fairly in detaining and torturing Ramji Lal in view of the fact that Final Report in the case registered under Section 379 IPC had already been submitted by Police Station Shiv Daspura on December 8, 2005 before the concerned Magistrate. When Ramji Lal appeared before us in the court he was limping and even according to case diary the injuries sustained by Ramji Lal were examined twice and the said injuries were also shown in his arrest memo.

6. Torture in any form, for the purpose of investigation into crime is not justified. It is barbarous and inhuman. No police lifestyle which relies more on fists than on wits, on torture more than on culture can control crime because means boomerang on ends and refuel the vice which it seeks to extinguish. Their Lordships of Supreme Court in Bhim Singhv. State of J & K : 1986 CriLJ192 indicated that Police Officers who are the custodians of law and order should have the greatest respect for the personal liberty of citizens and should not flout the laws by stooping to bizarre acts of lawlessness.

7. It has shocked our judicial conscience that in a case under Section 379 IPC, which is triable by First Class Magistrate and in which final report was submitted the bail application of Ramji Lal has been dismissed and he has been sent to judicial custody. We are satisfied that this case requires deep prob by an independent investigating agency.

8. As a result of above discussion, we deem it appropriate to issue following directions:

(1) The matter be inquired by the Central Bureau of Investigation, which will submit its report within one month from today. The inquiry shall be made on the following points:

(a) Whether detenue Ramji Lal has been given beating at the Police Station Shiv Daspura. Jaipur District, Jaipur?

(b) Whether he was nabbed while he was driving the auto rickshaw?

(c) Whether the alleged stolen motor cycle was recovered by the Police Station Shiv Daspura under Section 102 Cr.P.C, prior to the date of arrest of Ramji Lal?

(d) Whether Ramji Lal has been implicated in a false case and if so who is responsible for this illegal act?

(2) In view of the fact that Ramji Lal, who is limping in the court on account of injuries sustained by him and he is no longer required for the investigation purposes, we looking to the liberty of Ramji Lal, intend to invoke our inherent powers and release Ramji Lal on bail provided he furnishes personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5000/- and one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) Jaipur.

(3) A copy of the operative part of this order be sent to learned Additional Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Jaipur District Jaipur as well as the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur.

(4) The case shall be posted on March 20, 2006.

(5) The case diary along with the statement of Ramji Lal, affidavits filed by Kailash Bohra, SHO Shiv Daspura, Jaipur District, Jaipur and copy of the writ petition inclusive of annexures shall be kept in sealed cover and be sent in the sealed cover to the Central Bureau of Investigation.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 2006 Same Parties Narayan Lal vs State of Rajasthan and ors. Same Subject Constitution Same Judge Shiv Kumar Sharma and; R.S. Chauhan, JJ. Acts & Sections Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 379; Code of Criminal Proc...

Constitution