LexSHRI MUNIR ALAM versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
-· SHRI MUNIR ALAM v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. MAY 7, 1999 [DR. A.S. ANAND, C.J., M. JAGANNADHA RAO AND N. SANTOSH HEGDE, JJ.] Constitution of India, 1950-Artic/e 32-Police firing in the vicinity of A B the lodge of the Vice-Chancellor in which 20 years old son of the petitioner was killed-Petitioner alleging unjustified and unprovoked firing by the C police and investigation into it to have been conducted in a wholly slip shod and a biased manner-Report submitted by Additional District and Sessions Judge pointing lapses in the conduct of investigation-Subsequent direction to the State Government to have the matter inquired by some Independent Agency/Senior Officer-Instead of registering a case and getting investigated D by an independent agency, Chief Development Officer and the Superintendent of Police appointed to deconduct an enquiry-Their report which was diametrically opposite to the findings of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, not accepted by the Court as no such report had been sought-Jn view of the. report of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, C.B.I. E directed to hold an enquirylinvestigation-C.B.l. further directed to file a challan after the investigations, if need be and in the event thereof, request of the petitioner for award of exemplary damages to be decided by the Trial Court. Firing took place in the vicinity of the lodge of the Vice-Chancellor, F Aligarh Muslim University on the night intervening 1st and 2nd October, 1996 in which the 20 years old son of the petitioner was killed. Not satisfied with the investigation into the incident conducted by the Police, the father of the deceased filed this writ petition in this court, inter-alia, praying that fair investigation be got conducted into the incident through the C.B.I. G On behalf of the petitioner it was contended that the police, with a view to cover_ up its act of commission of unjustified and unprovoked firing, manipulated the record and filed a final report in the committal court. It was further contended that the investigation into the incident of firing was conducted in a wholly slip shod and a biased manner. 1209 H 1210 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1999) 2 S.C.R. A Notice was issued and counter and rejoinder affidavits were filed thereafter by the parties. Not being satisfied with reply, this count directed the Sessions Judge, Aligarh to inquire into the matter himself or to get it inquired by a competent officer, not below the rank of an Additional Sessions Judge. The IVth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Aligarh was detailed B to hold the enquiry. He submitted his report accordingly, bringing to light the lapses in the conduct of the investigation. The said report was allowed to be inspected by the parties. Subsequently, this court directed the State Government to have the matter inquired by some Independent Agency/Senior Officer Instead of C registering a case and getting it investigated by an independent agency, in the light of the report of the Additional District· and Sessions Judge, the Under Secretary, Home (Police) directed the matter to be "enquired" into by some senior officers. Thus, Senior Superintendent of Police and the District Magistrate, Aligarh appointed Chief Development Officer, Aligarh and the Superintendent of Police, Aligarh (Rural Area) as inquiry officers to inquire D into the matter. A report was submitted thereto before this Court. The findings recorded by the two officers in this report were diametrically opposite to the findings recorded by the Additional District and Sessions Judge. The said report was rejected by this Court as no such report had been sought while that submitted by the Additional District and Sessions Judge E was accepted. Allowing the petition, this Court HELD: 1. After perusing the report of the IVth Additional District and Sessions Judge dated 26th November, 1998, which is hereby accepted, it is considered necessary with a view to arrive at the truth, that the entire matter F be got investigated through the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I.). Director, C.B.I. is accordingly directed to hold an enquiry/ investigation into the incident which occurred during the intervening night of 1st and 2nd October, 1996 and into the related matters, keeping also in view the allegations made in this writ petition. The investigation may be got conducted, by the G Director C.B.I., through an officer, not b
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.