State Of M.P. & Anr vs Ram Prakash Singh & Anr

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRININAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 104 OF 2012 (arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 5877 of 2004)

STATE OF M.P. & ANR. Appellant (s)

VERSUS

RAM PRAKASH SINGH & ANR. Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

R.M. Lodha, J.

Leave granted.

2. On March 23, 2001, a gang of four criminals

comprising of Rambabu Gadariya, Dayaram, Pratap and Gopal,

while returning from Dabra to Gwalior after attending court,

escaped from the police custody. Allegedly, these four

criminals escaped with the help and connivance of the police

officers and/or negligence/inaction of the guards escorting

them. After escaping from the police custody, these four

criminals murdered 14 persons in village Bhanwarpura. This

led to harassment and torture of persons from gadariya

Criminal Appeal NO. 104 OF 2012 (arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 5877 of 2004)

2

(Baghel) caste by the police. They initially filed

complaint with the District Judge, but later on the first

respondent-Ram Prakash Singh filed a Writ Petition (being

Writ Petition No. 747 of 2001) in the nature of Public

Interest Litigation before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh,

Bench at Gwalior.

3. In that Writ Petition, it was alleged that

after escape of four dacoits noted above from police

custody, the police has started torturing the persons from

Baghel community in the Gwalior district. Accordingly, it

was prayed that the State of Madhya Pradesh and its

functionaries (respondents therein) be directed to refrain

from causing torture to the people of Baghel Samaj in the

district of Gwalior and directions be issued for protection

of their life and liberty.

4. The matter came up for consideration before

the High Court on various dates. As the matter was in the

nature of public interest litigation and the grievance was

raised that the above criminals after their escape were

causing havoc and they have not been taken into custody by

the police which has caused huge fear in the minds of the

people of the area, the High Court issued various directions

from time to time. The High Court asked the State

Government to hold an enquiry into the escape of above

Criminal Appeal NO. 104 OF 2012 (arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 5877 of 2004)

3

criminals from the police custody and submit the report

regarding action taken against the officers responsible for

the lapse. Despite numerous opportunities, the State

Government failed to respond to the directions given by the

High Court satisfactorily which constrained the High Court

to direct the Director General of Police, Madhya Pradesh, to

remain present in the Court. It appears that the Advocate

General of the State of Madhya Pradesh made a statement

before the High Court that the enquiry into the episode

shall be conducted by a very senior office of the State and

report submitted to the Court. However, nothing happened in

the matter. The High Court then called the Principal

Secretary (Home) in the Court. The Principal Secretary

(Home) appeared and made a statement that the enquiry into

the matter shall be conducted within a period of two months

from March 9, 2004. On June 30, 2004, on behalf of the

State Government, time was sought for submission of the

enquiry report, but no enquiry report was submitted. In the

backdrop of consistent inaction on the part of the State

Government in the matter, on November 8, 2004, the High

Court asked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to

hold enquiry into the matter of escape of the above

criminals from the police custody and the role of the

officers posted at Gwalior, particularly the role of

Criminal Appeal NO. 104 OF 2012 (arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 5877 of 2004)

4

Superintendent of Police, Gwalior, Inspector General of

Police, Gwalior, Superintendent, Central Jail, Gwalior,

Jailor, Central Jail, Gwalior, District Magistrate, Gwalior,

Town Inspector, Gwalior and Sub-Divisional Officer posted at

Dabra. It is this order which has been challenged by the

State of Madhya Pradesh and Superintendent of Police in this

Appeal, by special leave.

5. On December 17, 2004, this Court issued

notice to the respondents and stayed operation of the order

of the High Court impugned in the Appeal.

6. On November 28, 2007, this Court directed the

Chief Secretary, State of Madhya Pradesh, to appoint the

Additional Chief Secretary to conclude the enquiry into the

matter as expeditiously as possible and in any event within

three months from the date of the order and submit a report

to this Court.

7. In pursuance of the order dated November 28,

2007, an enquiry has been conducted by Shri Rakesh Bansal,

IAS, President Board of Revenue, Gwalior.

8. In his report dated May 29, 2008, the President

Board of Revenue, Gwalior, recorded his conclusions thus :-

"10. ..., I reach to the conclusion that the then S.P. Shri Anvesh Manglam, can not be held responsible for the incident of escape of dacoits from police custody.

Criminal Appeal NO. 104 OF 2012 (arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 5877 of 2004)

5

13. ...., I reach to the conclusion that Shri Yogesh Choudhary and Shri K.P. Sharma the then Deputy Superintendent of Police (Headquarters) can not be held responsible for this incident of escape of Gadaria gang from police custody.

14. ... For the whole chain of events, most responsible person is Reserve Inspector Ajay Tripathi only.

15. It is worth to mention here that Government has already dismissed/compulsorily retired from service two Head Constables and four constables deployed in the escort duty of dacoits for carrying them for appearance before court at the time of their escape."

9. It appears that the disciplinary proceedings

initiated against the Reserve Inspector Ajay Tripathi have

not been taken to logical conclusion in view of the stay

order obtained by him in a judicial proceeding.

10. In his report, Shri Rakesh Bansal, IAS, President

Board of Revenue, Gwalior has also made certain suggestions

in order to prevent repetition of such incident. These

suggestions are :-

"16(1) It should be provided in the Rules that dangerous prisoners must not be taken out of jail for journey by public transport vehicles or private vehicles, under any circumstances.

(2) Keeping in view the possibility of escape during transport of prisoners, it

Criminal Appeal NO. 104 OF 2012 (arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 5877 of 2004)

6

appear to be prudent that one regular court room be constructed in proximity to the central Jails.

The suggestion of the same intent has also been mentioned by the then Commissioner of Gwalior Division in his enquiry report on the page 27.

(3) It must be provided in the Jail Manual, that whenever any dangerous or sensitive prisoner is to be transferred from one jail to another jail, for court appearance or on administrative grounds, the jail superintendent should inform the concerned Superintendent of Police and District Magistrate vide a demi-official letter and by meeting them personally."

11. No affidavit has been filed by the present

appellants indicating whether the above suggestions of the

President, Board of Revenue, have been accepted by the State

Government or not. However, Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, learned

counsel for the appellants, submited that the State

Government did not have any reservation in accepting the

suggestions made by the President, Board of Revenue, in his

report as noted above.

12. As regards the arrest of the above criminals who

escaped from police custody on March 23, 2001, in the

additional affidavit filed by U.R. Netam, I.G. of Police,

Police Headquarters, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, dated April 01,

2007, it has been stated that 4 out of 5 dacoits of the gang

Criminal Appeal NO. 104 OF 2012 (arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 5877 of 2004)

7

have been killed in police encounters and only Rambabu

Gadaria is believed to be alive. It has also been stated

that all the weapons snatched by the above criminals while

escaping from police custody have been recovered.

13. Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, learned counsel for the

appellants, stated that Criminal Writ Petition No. 747 of

2001 was still pending before the High Court.

14. Having regard to the fact that the order dated

November 8, 2004 whereby the High Court directed the matter

to be referred to CBI for holding enquiry into the matter of

escape of above criminals from the police custody and the

role of various officers posted at Gwalior has been stayed

by this Court way back in the year 2004, and in 2007 the

direction was given to the Chief Secretary, Madhya Pradesh

to appoint the Additional Chief Secretary to conduct the

enquiry into the above matter and pursuant thereto Shri

Rakesh Bansal, IAS, President Board of Revenue, Gwalior, was

nominated by the Chief Secretary to hold the enquiry and he

has already held the enquiry and submitted his report dated

May 29, 2008, we are satisfied that the direction given by

the High Court to refer the matter to CBI to hold an enquiry

into the matter has lost its relevance. We, accordingly, set

aside the said direction.

15. The escape of four dreaded criminals from the police

Criminal Appeal NO. 104 OF 2012 (arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 5877 of 2004)

8

custody and the murder of 14 innocent persons by these

criminals after their escape are extremely serious matters.

In the matter as grave as this, the State Government was

expected to act promptly by taking action against the erring

police officials but it failed to act, necessitating drastic

order by the High Court. Though we have set aside the order

of the High Court impugned in this Appeal for the reasons

noted above, but the handling of the matter by the State

Government and its functionaries has been far from

satisfactory. We would like the State Government to take

appropriate action against the erring official/s without any

further delay and also take all remedial measures to ensure

that such things do not happen in future.

16. We direct the first appellant-State of Madhya

Pradesh, as suggested in the report submitted by Shri Rakesh

Bansal; (i) to make amendment in the existing rules and

provide that dangerous prisoners shall not be taken out of

jail for journey by public transport vehicles or private

vehicles under any circumstances, and (ii) provide in the

Jail Manual that whenever any dangerous or sensitive

prisoner is to be transferred from one jail to another jail,

for court appearance or on administrative grounds, the Jail

Superintendent should inform the concerned Superintendent of

Police and District Magistrate by a written communication as

Criminal Appeal NO. 104 OF 2012 (arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 5877 of 2004)

9

well as by meeting them. We also direct that the State

Government shall, in consultation with the High Court, take

a decision about construction of single court room complexes

for holding trial of dreaded criminals/dangerous prisoners

in proximity to the Central Jails.

17. The Action Taken Report about compliance of the

above directions shall be submitted by the first appellant

before the High Court.

18. With the above directions, Appeal stands disposed

of.

19. It shall be open to the High Court to issue further

directions, if necessary, in Criminal Writ Petition No. 747

of 2001, which is said to be still pending before the High

Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Gwalior.

........................J. (R.M. LODHA)

NEW DELHI; ........................J. JANUARY 10, 2012 (H.L. GOKHALE)