In Re: Relating To Crl. Intimidation vs Union Of India & Ors

IN T H E SU P R E M E COU R T O F IN DI A

C RI M I N A L O RI GI N A L JU RIS DI C TI O N

W rit Petition (Criminal) No. 23 of 2008

In Re.: Incident relating to Crl. Intimidation .... Petitioner(s) to a me m b er of C A T

Versus

Union of India & Ors. .... Respondent(s)

JU D G M E N T

Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

1. This case is an eye opener as it reveals that those who have been assigned the

solemn duty to dispense justice are facing criminal intimidation at the hands of the

authoritieswhich have the responsibilityto maintain the law and order.

2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this petition are that Shri B.V. Rao,

Judicial M e m ber of Central Ad ministrative Tribunal (hereinafter called `CAT') was

asked by the Hon'ble Chairman of the C A T to hold the Circuit Court at Ranchi,

Jharkhand from 18.2.2008 to 22.2.2008. After receiving intimation from Principal

Bench C A T, Ne w Delhi,the officer concerned at Ranchi Bench asked for reservation

of accom m odation for Shri B.V. Rao to the Secretary to the Government of Jharkhand in the Ho m e Department. In consequence thereof the DIG (Personnel) was asked for

reservation of two suites for two me m bers of C A T in the Khukhari Guest House.

Roo m no. 206 in that guest house was allotted to Shri B.V. Rao. The said room was

occupied by Shri B.V. Rao on proper authorization and allotments. W h en Shri B.V.

Rao came back from the Tribunal to the Guest House on 21.2.2008 at about 4.30

p.m.,S mt. Nirmala Choudhary, Inspector General of Police (R-3) interrogated him as

to in what capacity he was staying there? Inspite of disclosing his identity by Shri

B.V. Rao and informing her about the purpose for which he had come there,she left

the room. After a short while,at about 5.15 p.m.,eight police personnel,who were in

uniform and having arms, forcibly opened the door of his room after breaking the

bolt. They abused Shri B.V. Rao and searched the entire room. They did not even

spare to examine the judicialrecords of C A T. Those police persons dragged Shri Rao

to the ground floor along with his belongings where S mt. Nirmala Choudhary (R-3)

was standing. She forced him to open his suit case, brief-

case and all other

belongings. She had taken away his identitycard, flight ticket,tour program me sheet

and authorization letter granted by the Chairman for holding the court at Ranchi

besides he was criminally intimidated and abused.

3. Im mediately,afterthe incident,Shri B.V. Rao informed the Director General of

Police (hereinaftercalled `DGP'), Jharkhand about the incident on the same day. The

D G P directed Shri P.R.K. Naidu, IG, SpecialBranch to look into the matter and report

im mediately. After conducting the enquiry, Shri P.R.K. Naidu, IG submitted his

reporton 22.2.2008. According to the said report,S mt. Nirmala Choudhary (R-3) was not in a right frame of mind and suffering from some kind of sehizophrenia. The

armed persons who were on duty along with her had carried out her illegalorders. On

the next day, the D G P along with other senior officers met Shri B.V. Rao in his room

and apologized personally for grave inconvenience caused to him due to

unpardonable behaviour of senior police officer disclosing that S mt. Nirmala

Choudhary (R-3) was suffering from mental disorder.

4. Ho wever, considering the incident of 21.2.2008, an FIR was lodged in

Doranda Police Station by Shri Bandi Bhagat, Office Incharge, C A T, Ranchi giving

full details of the incident. Thus, an FIR in Case No. 43 dated 22.2.2008 under

Sections 143, 144, 146, 323, 339 and 352 IPC stood registered against S mt. Nirmala

Choudhary (R-3) and eight police persons. In the mean while,Shri B.V. Rao, Judicial

M e m ber of C A T wrote letter to Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India and Hon'ble

Chairman of C A T, Principal Bench, Ne w Delhi narrating the entire incident and

requested to take appropriate steps to protect the me m bers of C A T in future to avoid

such unfortunate situation. The said letter was treated as a criminal writ petition.

This Court,vide order dated 3 rd M arch, 2008 issued notices to Union of India,State of

Jharkhand and S mt. Nirmala Choudhary (R-3).

5. The Hon'ble Chairman of C A T, Ne w Delhi took up the matter with the Hon'ble

Minister of State,Ministry of Personnel Grievances and Pensions by writing a letter

dated 25 th February, 2008 expressing his grave concern about the safety and security

of judicialand administrative me m bers of C A T giving detailsof the incident. On 10 th M arch, 2008, the High Court of Jharkhand initiated the criminal contempt

proceedings suo motu. In W P( C) No. 1233 of 2008 (Court on its own M otion vs.

The State of Jharkhand) the Court passed the order dated 2/3.3.2008 asking learned

Advocate General to look into the matter and to take im mediate appropriate action in

the case. Ho wever, considering the fact that this Court had taken cognizance of the

incident, the High Court deferred the hearing of the said case vide order dated

10.3.2008.

6. The C A T, Patna Bench also initiated criminal contempt proceedings in case No.

22 of 2008 against S mt. Nirmala Choudhary (R-3) and eight armed police personnel

vide Order dated 22.4.2008. The said matter is stillpending consideration. Ho wever,

on the letterwritten by Hon'ble Chairman of the C A T, no action has been taken by the

Ministry concerned tilltoday. A m ple opportunitieshad been given to the respondents

in this criminal Writ Petition to file their affidavits.The State of Jharkhand and S mt.

Nirmala Choudhary (R-3) have filed theirrespective replies. But Union of India (R-

1) did not file the reply. The State of Jharkhand (R-2) through its Ho me Secretary,

Shri Sudhir Tripathihas admitted that there had been proper reservation for Shri B.V.

Rao, learned me m ber of C A T in the said guest house. Ho wever, the incident

occurred because S mt. Nirmala Choudhary (R-3) was not in a right frame of mind and

was suffering from schizophrenia. The armed constables along with her, obeyed her

illegal orders and intimidated Shri B.V. Rao. S mt. Nirmala Choudhary (R-3) had

acted in haste under the effect of mental disorder. She had been examined medically

im mediately, after the incident at Ranchi as well as at Bangalore and it has been diagnosed that she was under "delusion disorder in partial remission". It has been

assured by the State Government that itwould take all steps in accordance with law

in the case arising out of the said incident.

7. The State of Jharkhand (R-2) had admitted that every allegation and averment

made by Shri B.V. Rao was factually correct and S mt. Nirmala Choudhary (R-3) had

not only misbehaved with Shri B.V. Rao but scolded M ess Incharge also who was

present there and asked him to leave the place im mediately or else he would be sent to

jail. Itis further admitted thatthe other eight securitypersonnel misbehaved with Shri

B.V. Rao and the said securitypersonnel had been put under suspension.

8. A certificate of Ranchi Institute of Neuro-Psychatry and Allied Sciences

(RINP A S) dated 3 rd M arch, 2008 has been placed on record according to which S mt.

Nirmala Choudhary (R-3) suffered from "psychosis Paranoid Delusional Disorder".

9. S mt. Nirmala Choudhary(R-3) has filed the affidavit dated 15 th Nove mber

2008 in reply and tendered absolute and unconditional apology for the incident. It

has been further stated that she was suffering from mental disorder. Therefore, she

could hardly reme mber the actual incident which had taken place. Thus, she had done

nothing intentionally.In para 14 of her affidavit,she has stated as under :

"That itis most humbly submitted that on account of her mental imbalance and delusionary frame of mind the deponent had no control over her power of reason or over her behaviour particularlywhen confronted with strangers"

10. She has also placed several letters and press clippings showing that she had always been asking for her personal security apprehending the risk to her lifethough

itmight be because of her mental imbalance.

11. Shri U.U. Lalit, learned senior counsel, appearing as A micus Curiae, has

brought to the notice of this Court, the repeated incidents of abuses and criminal

intimidation with the me m bers of the C A T and placed the facts of the connected Writ

Petition No. 74 of 2007 wherein the unfortunate incident occurred at the residence of

M s. Sadhana Shrivastava, a Judicial me m ber of C A T, Patna Bench by the gangsters

wherein one person also lostlife. Ho wever, we are not taking note of the facts of the

said case,as the said case is to be decided separately and has been delinked from this

case. Ho wever, itis evident thatallis not good so far as the safety and securityof the

M e m bers of the C A T are concerned. Shri Lalit submitted that in the present case, a

superior officer of the police has intimidated the judicialme m ber of C A T though she

might be suffering from mental disorder. Ho wever, there had been no response by the

concerned Ministries in the Union of India to the letter written by the Hon'ble

Chairman of C A T dated 25 th February 2008 giving reference to his earlierletterdated

6 th June, 2007 asking for providing security to the Chairman and M e m bers of the

C A T, this Court must ensure that proper security be provided to the M e m bers of the

C A T so thatthey may be saved from any untoward and unsavoury incident in future.

It is an obligation on the part of the State authoritiesand all other concerned persons

to provide a conducive atmosphere for dispensation of justice.

12. Learned counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand has assured the Court that State Government would ensure safety of all the M e m bers of C A T so that such

incident may not be repeated.

13. Mr. Naresh Kaushik, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India has

submitted that in view of the prevailing circumstances, the Union of India and

respective State Authoritiesare under the obligation to provide not only the minimu m

courtesy but also adequate securityto allthe M e m bers of the C A T.

14. Shri Raju Ra machandran, learned senior counsel appearing for S mt. Nirmala

Choudhary(R-3) has submitted that whatever unfortunate incident had happened, it

was unintentional and because of the fact that she (R-3) was suffering from mental

disorder.She is facing proceedings for criminal contempt initiated by C A T, Patna. He

has also suggested that proper security to all the M e m bers of C A T is required to

protectthem from any kind of humiliation and intimidation.

15. W e have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties

and perused the records. Allegations of criminal intimidation and humiliation of Shri

B.V. Rao at the hands of S mt. Nirmala Choudhary (R-3) and eight other police

personnel along with her, cannot be said to be without any substance. As the State of

Jharkhand (R-2) had conducted a full-

fledged enquiry and submitted the report and,

considering the fact that the writ petition and criminal contempt petition are pending

in Jharkhand High Court and in C A T Bench at Patna, we do not consider itproper to

express any opinion as to what action is required to be taken against the erring

officersin respect of the said incident. The concerned Court/Tribunal would proceed in accordance with law and undoubtedly the cases would reach to their logical ends.

It is,however, clarified that any observation made herein above, would not prejudice

the case of either party. It is for the State Authorities to decide as to whether S mt.

Nirmala Choudhary (R-3) is fitto render any service to the State and if so, in what

capacity.

16. Ho wever, considering the fact-

situation of this case and other existing

exceptional circumstances and taking into account the suggestions made by the

learned counsel appearing for the Union of India and for the State of Jharkhand, itis

directed that the Union of India and respective States would provide minimu m

courtesy required and adequate security to all the M e m bers of the C A T, within a

period of eight weeks from today. Necessary instructions be issued to all the

authorities/ persons concerned under the control of State Governments and Union

Territories.

17. Before parting with the case, we express our thanks and gratitude to Shri U.U.

Lalit,learned Senior Advocate for rendering assistance to the Court as A micus Curiae.

18. A copy of this judgment be sent to the Registrar,C A T, Principal Bench, Ne w

Delhi for taking appropriatesteps for implementation of directions issued herein.

19. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... . C J I. (K.G. Balakrishnan)

........................................J. ( P. Sathasivam )

......................................J. (Dr. B.S. Chauhan) New Delhi;

August 25, 2009.