LexGULZAR AHMED AZMI & ANR. versus UNI.ON OF INDIA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012] 9 S.C.R. 287 GULZAR AHMED AZMI & ANR. v. UNI.ON OF INDIA & ORS. (Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 19 of 2012) OCTOBER 11, 2012 [T.S. THAKUR AND FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, JJ.] A B Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 32 rlw Article 21 - Bomb blast cases since 2002 - Investigation - Grievance of C the writ petitioners that while the real culprits were being shielded, innocent Muslim boys were being roped in such cases - Prayer that in order to unearth the truth, the Supreme Court should direct the first respondent to constitute a Committee headed by a retired Judge of the Supreme Court o and assisted by a team of officers having competent investigation skills along with other experts - Held: Not tenable - If any such Committee is directed to be constituted that will only result in making a roving inquiry into the various criminal proceedings so far lodged connected with cases of E bomb blasts all over the country - Since criminal cases registered in connection with various incidents are either pending trial before the competent jurisdictional courts or being investigated by the jurisdictional police, it is premature to say whether any and if so which of the accused is innocent or has been-falsely implicated - If anyone is falsely roped in F any offence either under the provisions of Indian Penal Code or under any other special enactments, by way of criminal proceeding, there are enough safeguards provided under the various laws and under the criminal law jurisprudence, to protect the interest of any such person - When the time tested G Criminal Procedure Code and other statutory provisions are working in the field providing for such we/I laid down procedure to be followed in the matter of regulating such criminal 287 H 288 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 9 S.C.R. A proceedings, the granting of the petitioners' prayer would amount to creating a parallel body without any statutory sanction and to function only under some directions of the Supreme Court which would be Jacking in very many procedural details and will ultimately result in utter chaos and B confusion in dealing with the criminal proceedings which have already been lodged and progressing before various criminal courts - It is for the concerned individuals who face such criminal proceedings to work out their remedy in the manner known to law - Even if such individuals are not in a position c to seek for any appropriate legal assistance on their own, there is no dearth for seeking legal assistance free of cost - It cannot be held that the concerned individuals will be left with no remedy - Writ petition accordingly dismissed. CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Crl) D No. 19 of 2012. Under Ar!:icle 32 of the Constitution of India. A. Sharan, Syed Mehdi Imam, Atif Suhrawardy, Tarbez E Ahmed, Somesh Jha for the Petitioners. The Order of the Court was delivered by FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, J. 1. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition under Article 32 read F with Article 21 of the Constitution ostensibly in public interest in which the petitioners pray for a Writ of Mandamus for constitution of a Committee to make further investigation of all the bomb blasts cases which have taken place since 2002. 2. When we examine the relief prayed for by the G petitioners, we find that there are as many as six substantive prayers made by them including constitution of a Committee headed by a retired Judge of the Supreme Court along with team of competent officers and experts to make further investigation of all bomb blasts cases which have taken place H GULZAR AHMED AZMI & ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA 289 [FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, J.] since 2002 onwards. The prayer specifically mentions a list by A way of Annexure P-45 wherein the details have been mentioned in order to monitor the investigation to be ordered while granting any relief in the writ petition. 3. The further prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to initiate criminal or departmental action against the erring police officers for having implicated alleged innocent Muslim boys by fabricating false evidence. 4. The third prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to B the respondents to initiate criminal or departmental action C against the officers of Central and State Intelligence Agencies, who furnished wrong inputs to the State Police and thereby pressurised
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.