Wrongful prosecution (miscarriage of justice) *

Anil Kumar Shukla **

Abstract
This assignment/article is based on critical analysis firstly, of S. Nambi
Narayanan v. Siby Mathews & Others Etc. 1 and Adambhai Sulemanbhai
v. State of Gujrat 2 cases, and Secondly, of Babloo Chauhan @ Dabloo v.
3
State Government of NCT of Delhi case and others in the light of
various reports such as by amicus Curie Dr. G S Bajpeyi, 4
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

* Idea came in my mind, when widely published and highlighted case of S Nambi Narayanan
came in public domain on September 25, 2018, again after 24 years (1994). Importance of the case lies in the fact
that he was arrested by Kerala police on November 30, 1994 and within 4 days, investigation was handed over to
the CBI on December 04, 1994
**
LL.M. student, (23/LLM/ILI/2018), Indian Law Institute (ILI), New Delhi, Mobile & What Sapp No. 9953606303,
Email: anilkumarshukla67@gmail.com
1. Civil Appeal Nos.6637-6638 of 2018, Decided by the Supreme Court on September 24, 2018
2. (2014) 7 SCC 716.
3. 247 (2018) DLT 31.
4. A report before High Court of Delhi, by amicus Curie Prof. (Dr.) G S Bajpeyi, Centre for Criminology &
Victimology, K L Arora Chair in Criminal Law and Registrar, NLU Delhi

Anil Shukla <anilkumarshukla67@gmail.com>

Humble prayer to send the report and a few minutes for interaction
2 messages

Anil Shukla <anilkumarshukla67@gmail.com> Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 7:48 AM

To: registrarnlud@nludelhi.ac.in
Bcc: satyapriyarishabh <satyapriyarishabh@gmail.com>

Dear Sir,

With utmost respect I may kindly be allowed to pray before your good self to send me the report which your
good self has submitted to Delhi High Court in Babloo Chauhan @ Dabloo v. State Government of NCT of Delhi case
and also a few minutes of your precious time to interact with me regarding wrongful prosecution (Miscarriage of
Justice) because my topic of research is the same and I am a student of Indian Law Institute (ILI) New Delhi and I
have already attended & participated in panel discussion on wrongful prosecution (Miscarriage of Justice) conducted
by your good self at India International Center, seminar hall, New Delhi on October 01, 2018 at 04:30 P.M.
With Regards
Anil Kumar Shukla
9953606303

Law Commission, 5 DAKSH 6 and panel discussion7 etc. Author argues

 critically reasons for wrongful prosecution in pre and post-colonial
India and why there is no quick & time bound, just & transparent,
free & fair, independent & impartial, accountable & responsible,
legal & administrative, legislative and judicial actions thereof after
seventy years of independence.

Registrar NLU Delhi <registrar@nludelhi.ac.in> Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 10:32 AM

To: anilkumarshukla67@gmail.com

Dear Sh. Anil Kumar,

You may kindly access the report On Wrongful Incarceration Default in Payment of Fine Suspension of Sentence - A
Report by Amicus Curiae at the link -
https://nludelhi.ac.in/download/publication/2017/On%20Wrongful%20Incarceration%20Default%20in%20Payment%
20of%20Fine%20Suspension%20of%20Sentence.pdf
With best wishes,
Prof. (Dr.) G.S. Bajpai | Registrar |National Law University, Delhi|
Sector - 14, Dwarka, New Delhi-110 078. |INDIA
Tel: 011-28034255| Fax : 011-2803-4254|
E-mail: registrar@nludelhi.ac.in

5. 277th report by Law C0mmission of India, released on August 30, 2018

6. The state of Indian judiciary, a report by DAKSH
7. On wrongful prosecution (miscarriage of justice), on October 01, 2018
AnilShukla<anilkumarshukla67@gmail.com>

Fwd: Invitation to Panel Discussion on Wrongful Prosecution (Miscarriage of Justice): Legal Remedies - Report 277
of Law Commission on 1st October, 2018..

amit vashist <amitnatrss@gmail.com> Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 6:12 PM

To: anilkumarshukla67@gmail.com

---------- Forwarded message ---------

From: Registrar Office <registrarnlud@nludelhi.ac.in>
Date: Wed 19 Sep, 2018, 12:00 PM
Subject: Invitation to Panel Discussion on Wrongful Prosecution (Miscarriage of Justice): Legal Remedies - Report 277
of Law Commission on 1st October, 2018..
To: amit vashist <amitnatrss@gmail.com>
Cc: Registrar NLU Delhi <registrar@nludelhi.ac.in>, AR COORDINATION <arcoordination@nludelhi.ac.in>,
<pratibha.tandon@nludelhi.ac.in>

Dear Mr. Amit Vashist

The Law Commission of India has released its 277th report on 30th August 2018 titled “Wrongful Prosecution
(Miscarriage of Justice): Legal Remedies.” The report is primarily based on the Delhi High Court’s decision in the case
of Babloo Chauhan @ Dabloo v. State Government of NCT Delhi. This issue cropped in the said decision before the
Delhi High Court where the Delhi High Court appointed Prof.(Dr.) G.S. Bajpai, Registrar, National Law University
Delhi as the Amicus Curiae to prepare and submit a report focusing on the following issues:

(a) A background on the substantive law and procedure relating to the “Default in payments of fine”
(b) What is the existing law on “Suspension of Sentence” as given under the scheme of section 389 of the Criminal
Procedural Code 1973?
(c) What are the possible legal remedies for victims of wrongful incarceration and malicious prosecution in India?
The present report of the Law Commission makes a strong case for the amendments in laws to provide relief to the
wrongfully prosecuted persons. It is in this context it would be highly relevant to debate and discuss certain aspects of
this report critically as for the first time, the term wrongful prosecution is being conceptualized within the criminal
jurisprudence in India. The following points become relevant for a critical discussion:

I - INTRODUCTION
S. Nambi Narayanan and Adambhai case has similarities, the investigations by the Kerala
police and Gujrat police (state police), collected evidences which were false and fabricated, not
corroborated, nor veracity of witnesses verified. The result of which was wrongful prosecution.
Investigation in first case was transferred to CBI within four days but in later case requests of
victims were never considered, Therefore, result of first case was discharge from the trial court but
conviction from the trial court in later case which was also confirmed by the High court even.
Acquittal with Compensation and constitution of committee headed by former justice of supreme
court with one officer from state government and central government each to find out ways and
means to take appropriate steps against the erring officials in first case but mere acquittal without
compensation & committee in second case created many questions and doubts.
II – S. NAMBI NARAYANAN CASE 8
The Supreme Court in the present case held that a successful Indian Space Research
Organisation (ISRO scientist namely S. Nambi Narayanan (hereinafter called as victim) having
national reputation 9 has been compelled to undergo immense humiliation. The lackadaisical State
Police to arrest anyone and put him in police custody has made the victim to suffer the ignominy.
The dignity of a person gets shocked when psychopathological treatment is meted out to him. A
human being cries for justice when he feels that the insensible act has crucified his self-respect.
That warrants grants of compensation under the public law remedy……….The Court cannot lose
sight of the wrongful imprisonment, malicious prosecution, the humiliation and the defamation
faced by him.
The bench of Chief Justice of India Deepak Mishra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y
_________________________________________________________________________________________

(i) Law Commission’s approach to wrongful prosecution, malicious prosecution and miscarriage to Justice.
(ii) The extent to which the best practices in other jurisdiction have been imbibed by the Report.
(iii) Whether the present report adequately addresses the genuine concerns of wrongfully prosecuted person
specially in the situation of suspension sentence.
(iv) The appropriateness of methodology adopted for the study.
(v) To critically evaluate the relevance and feasibility of the prescribed amendments in the section 365(B) of
CrPC.

The National Law University Delhi proposes to organize a Panel Discussion on this Report focussing on the above
aspects on October 1st, 2018 i.e. on Monday at 4.30 P.M. in India International Centre, Seminar Hall, New Delhi.
It would be our privilege to invite you as a participant to give your remarks in the discussion on this issue.
A line in confirmation shall highly be appreciated.
With regards,
Yours sincerely,
8. Supra note 1.
 9. Id. at.28, see para 34 & 35.
10. (2006) 3 SCC 178
11.

State Police to arrest anyone and put him in police custody has made the victim to suffer the
ignominy. The dignity of a person gets shocked when psychopathological treatment is meted out to
him. A human being cries for justice when he feels that the insensible act has crucified his self respect.
That warrants grants of compensation under the public law remedy……….The Court cannot lose sight
of the wrongful imprisonment, malicious prosecution, the humiliation and the defamation faced by
him.
The bench of Chief Justice of India Deepak Mishra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y
Chandrachud awarded compensation of rupees 50 lakh to the victim and constituted a committee to
find out ways and means to take appropriate steps against the erring officials which shall be headed by
Justice D K Jain, a former Judge of Supreme Court. The Central Government and the State
Government are directed to nominate one Officer each so that apposite action can be taken.
Supreme Court in Sube Singh v. State of Haryana and ors,10 the three-Judge Bench, after
referring to the earlier decisions, has opined :-
“38. It is thus now well settled that the award of compensation against the
State is an appropriate and effective remedy for redress of an established
infringement of a fundamental rights under Article 21, by a public servant. The
quantum of compensation will, however, depend upon the facts and
circumstances of each case. Award of such compensation (by way of public
law remedy) will not come in the way of the aggrieved person claiming
additional compensation in a civil court, in the enforcement of the private law
remedy in tort, nor come in the way of the criminal court ordering
compensation under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.”
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Supra note 1.
2. Id. at.28, see para 34 & 35.
3. (2006) 3 SCC 178.
VI -CONCLUSION 9
The Supreme Court in the present case
(i) Backgrounds of case
 Interview of victim, an ISRO ex scientist with Jessi Shibu in Dainik Bhaskar, discloses
that he was wrongly prosecuted because one police officer wanted sexual relations with a
Maldivian national Mariam Rasheeda forcibly. But he failed10.

(ii) Facts

S Nambi Narayanan was an ex. ISRO scientist who was arrested on 30.11.1994 along
with two persons. Consequent upon request of government of Kerala and the decision of
the government of India, investigation was transferred to Central Bureau of Investigation
(CBI).

(iii) Trial Court

Trial Court failed to apply judicial mind and ordered judicial custody for accused along
with Narayanan without any evidence and valid reasons. It is evident from CBI report
submitted under section 173 (2) to court of Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Ernakulamm
stating that the evidence collected indicated that the allegations of espionage against the
scientists at ISRO including him were not proved and were found false. This report was
accepted by the CJM and they were discharged vide court’s order dated 02.05.1996.

(iv) High Court

Double bench of High Court of Kerala failed to play its role in the right manner which
upheld state notification to restart investigation in the case when CBI found state police
official at fault & recommended action against them. High Court again failed to justify
which upheld state’s decision not to take any action against erring officials. Both decisions
were set aside by the Supreme Court.

(v) Supreme Court

Although myriad of cases of wrongful prosecution have been coming in Supreme

Court, but there is lack of desire to provide complete justice such cases. Keeping in mind
‘justice delayed is justice denied’, is merely acquittal, compensation of rupees 50 lakh and
constitution / formation of a committee to find out ways and means to take appropriate
steps against the erring officials.
(vi)

one STATE SPOSERED criminal acts against people of India are serious concerns for the
legal researchers, thinkers and luminaries in nuance and people of India. The largest
democracy of the world and the dignity of Supreme Court of India worldwide, but still no
check and balance in this regard.
(vii) It has been strictly hitting hard the basic principles and structures of constitution of India. It
is no way democratic when state instead of being a welfare state sponsoring criminal acts
against common people, scientists, intellectuals and teachers working for the nation
consorted, co-operative and various pressure groups of corruptions has been in closed
network which flows from higher level to lower just like water. It shocks us deeply when
High Court of Kerala held and expressed no need of action against the responsible
criminals who supported, protected and safeguarded criminal conspirators of wrongful
prosecution of S Nambi Narayanan, an ISRO scienst in false espionage case.
(viii)
(ix) Justice in ancient India
(x)
Adambhai case10
(xi) Backgrounds of case

Accused No. 1, (A-1)

Accused No. 2 Adambhai Sulemanbhai Ajmeri (A-2)
Accused No. 3 Adambhai Sulemanbhai Ajmeri (A-3)
Accused No. 4 Abdulrashid Suleman Ajmeri (A-4)
Abdullamiya yashinmiya Kaduri (A-5)
Aforesaid accused convicted and sentences are meted out to them under by the Special
Court (POTA) and upheld by High Court of Gujrat.
On 24.09.2002 at about 4:30 P M, two persons armed with A K 56 rifles, hand grenades
etc. entered in Swaminarayan Akshardham Temple, Gandhinagar Gujrat and attacked
persons therein. The attack resulted in killings of 33 persons, including NSG commandos.
Nearly 86 persons including 23 police officers and jawans were grievously injured.
A complaint was lodged by the then ACO GL Singhal (PW-126) crime branch on
24.09.2002, thereafter an FIR was also lodged by him (PW-126) on 25.09.2002.
 Investigation was handed over to police inspector V R Toliya (PW-119), transferred to
ATS, and thereafter, was further transferred to (PW-126) on 28.08.2003.

(xii) Facts

S Nambi Naraayan was an ISRO scientist who was arrested on 30.11.1994 along with
two persons. Consequent upon request of government of Kerala and the decision of the
government of India, investigation was transferred to Central Bureau of Investigation
(CBI).
(xiii) Facts

S Nambi Naraayan was an ISRO scientist who was arrested on 30.11.1994 along with
two persons. Consequent upon request of government of Kerala and the decision of the
government of India, investigation was transferred to Central Bureau of Investigation
(CBI).

(xiv) Trial Court

CBI submitted its report to Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) stating that the evidence
collected indicated that the allegations of espionage against the scientists at ISRO including
him were not proved and were found false. This report was accepted by the CJM and they
were discharged vide court’s order dated 02.05.1996.

(xv) High Court

CBI submitted its report to Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) stating that the evidence
collected indicated that the allegations of espionage against the scientists at ISRO including
him were not proved and were found false. This report was accepted by the CJM and they
were discharged vide court’s order dated 02.05.1996.

(xvi) Supreme Court

(xvii)
(xviii)
 one STATE SPOSERED criminal acts against people of India are serious concerns for the
legal researchers, thinkers and luminaries in nuance and people of India. The largest
democracy of the world and the dignity of Supreme Court of India worldwide, but still no
check and balance in this regard.
(xix) It has been strictly hitting hard the basic principles and structures of constitution of India. It
is no way democratic when state instead of being a welfare state sponsoring criminal acts
against common people, scientists, intellectuals and teachers working for the nation
consorted, co-operative and various pressure groups of corruptions has been in closed
network which flows from higher level to lower just like water. It shocks us deeply when
High Court of Kerala held and expressed no need of action against the responsible
criminals who supported, protected and safeguarded criminal conspirators of wrongful
prosecution of S Nambi Narayanan, an ISRO scienst in false espionage case.
(xx)
(xxi) Justice in ancient India

Arts. 136, 142, 21 and 20(3) - Akshardham Temple Attack case - Illegal framing of innocent persons –
Concurrent convictions and sentences (some sentenced to death) -
Criminal Law
Terrorism and Organised Crime
Ss. 50 and 52 - Sanction under S. 50 - Invalidity - Non-application of mind (neither informed decision
nor independent application of mind nor consultation with IO) - Deposition of PW 88 (Principal
Secretary, Home) indicated that neither he nor Minister applied their mind nor consulted with IO - And
further IO had not placed all relevant documents before them - Resultant sanction given by Minister,
held, is illegal and invalid, (2014) 7 SCC 716-C
Criminal Law
Terrorism and Organised Crime
Ss. 50 and 52 - Sanction under S. 50 - Sanction granted without application of mind - But counsel for
accused not contesting the same - Effect on validity of sanction - Said sanction, held, cannot be
validated by court on the ground that it has not been contested by the counsel for accused, (2014) 7
SCC 716-D
Criminal Law
Terrorism and Organised Crime
S. 32 - Confession before police officer under - Requirements of desired caution and assurance to
accused confessors, held, were not given by PW 78 (DCP) who recorded their confession - Written
records of caution not preceding confessions as a continuous process in the same document but
existing as a separate disjunctive evidence - Further, PW 78 (DCP) also admitted that he had not
assured the accused persons that not making the confessional statement will not put them in any
adverse position - Such manner of recording, held, failed to comply with the required chain of
procedure thereby making the confessions inadmissible in evidence, (2014) 7 SCC 716-E
Criminal Law

Criminal Law
Terrorism and Organised Crime
Akshardham Temple Attack case (35 died and more than 85 injured) - Illegal framing of innocent
persons – Concurrent convictions and sentences of all accused (3 of whom had been sentenced to
death), set aside, and attempt at their false implication by State, stringently deprecated -
Uncorroborated, unconnected and contradictory retracted confessions, illegally and forcibly extracted
to frame innocent and unconnected persons because police, after a long delay of about a
year, failed to nab unknown terrorists/masterminds of the crime - It is a mystery as to how, after one
year, police came to know about PW 50 approver whose statement led to revelation of entire
conspiracy - No doubt PW 126 stated that information about PW 50 was given by D.G. Vanzara - But
said relevant witness D.G. Vanzara was not examined in court (see especially para 216) - Besides,
confessions of accused and accomplices was not corroborated by any independent
admissible evidence - Further, sanction under S. 50, POTA was given without application of mind by
sanctioning authority and prosecution failed to prove the crime against A-1 to A-6 beyond reasonable
doubt - Prosecution story did not form a complete credible chain linking the accused with the crime,
thus, said concurrent convictions and sentences set aside - A-1 to A-6 acquitted of all charges -
Appellants who might be in custody, directed to be released if not required in other crimes, (2014) 7
SCC 716-A
Constitution of India
Arts. 136, 142, 21 and 20(3) - Akshardham Temple Attack case - Illegal framing of innocent persons -
Concurrent
convictions and sentences (some sentenced to death) - Relief to one such innocent person (A-1) who
had served his
sentence of 5 yrs of RI and preferring not to appeal against said conviction and sentence - Conviction
against A-1 also
set aside in exercise of power under Art. 142 so that he can be absolved of his stigma and is able to
return to his family
and society free from suspicion, (2014) 7 SCC 716-B
Criminal Law
Terrorism and Organised Crime
Ss. 50 and 52 - Sanction under S. 50 - Invalidity - Non-application of mind (neither informed decision
nor independent
application of mind nor consultation with IO) - Deposition of PW 88 (Principal Secretary, Home)
indicated that neither he
nor Minister applied their mind nor consulted with IO - And further IO had not placed all relevant
documents before them -
Resultant sanction given by Minister, held, is illegal and invalid, (2014) 7 SCC 716-C
Criminal Law
Terrorism and Organised Crime
Ss. 50 and 52 - Sanction under S. 50 - Sanction granted without application of mind - But counsel for
accused not
contesting the same - Effect on validity of sanction - Said sanction, held, cannot be validated by court
on the ground that
it has not been contested by the counsel for accused, (2014) 7 SCC 716-D
Criminal Law
Terrorism and Organised Crime
S. 32 - Confession before police officer under - Requirements of desired caution and assurance to
accused confessors,
held, were not given by PW 78 (DCP) who recorded their confession - Written records of caution not
preceding
confessions as a continuous process in the same document but existing as a separate disjunctive
evidence - Further,
PW 78 (DCP) also admitted that he had not assured the accused persons that not making the
confessional statement will
not put them in any adverse position - Such manner of recording, held, failed to comply with the
required chain of
procedure thereby making the confessions inadmissible in evidence, (2014) 7 SCC 716-E
Criminal Law
The Practical Lawyer
http://www.supremecourtcases.com
Eastern Book Company
Generated: Sunday, October 21, 2018
Terrorism and Organised Crime
S. 32 - Confession before police officer under - Reasonable time for reflection - What is and whether
was given in
present case - After about 11 months of Akshardham Temple Attack, confessors being given only 15
minutes to reflect
by PW 78 (DCP), held, is not reasonable (even if confessors had not asked for further time) - What
would be reasonable time depends upon facts and circumstances of a given case, (2014) 7 SCC 716-F
Criminal Law
Terrorism and Organised Crime
S. 32(5) - Post-confessional statement before CJM under - Importance of and seriousness required on
part of CJM -
Recording of such post-confessional statement under S. 32(5) should not be a mere formality - It
should inspire
confidence to show that procedure has been scrupulously followed which unfortunately was not done
in present case,
(2014) 7 SCC 716-G
Criminal Law
Terrorism and Organised Crime
S. 32(5) - Post-confessional statement before CJM under - CJM completing procedure within half-an-
hour when
confession was more than 15 pages, held, was improper, mechanical and unwarranted - It is highly
improbable that a
confessional statement of more than 15 pages could be read back to the confessor within half-an-hour -
Callous manner
in which confessional statement was recorded by CJM (PW 99) was disapproved - Conduct of CJM
(PW 99) disapproved
as being that of a passive reluctant officer involved in some procedural formality, (2014) 7 SCC 716-H
Criminal Law
Terrorism and Organised Crime
S. 32(5) - Requirement that accused shall be sent to judicial custody under, held, is mandatory
(whether confessor
complains about police torture or not) - CJM not having complied with said statutory procedure,
rendered the confession
inadmissible in evidence - CJM did not send the confessors to judicial custody immediately after
recording their post-confessional statements under S. 32(5), (2014) 7 SCC 716-I
Evidence Act, 1872
Ss. 133, 24 to 26 and 114 Ill. (b) - Evidence of an accomplice - Evidentiary value - Twin test: (a) that
accomplice should
implicate himself, and (b) that his evidence should prove guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt -
Held, not satisfied
in present case to make alleged accomplices' evidence admissible and corroborate confessions of
accused persons - In
relation to Akshardham Temple Attack by two fidayeens (terrorist attackers), the statements of alleged
accomplices (PWs
50, 51 and 52) not being able to establish any connection of attack with A-1 to A-6 except casting a
mere suspicion
regarding involvement of A-1 to A-6 - Name of A-6 had not been mentioned in the evidence of any of
the
accomplices/approvers - If money collected by A-3 was used to run relief camps in Gujarat, it merely
casts a suspicion -
Held, the twin test was not satisfied in present case - Though it can be presumed that the accomplices
have implicated
themselves, their statements have failed to prove the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt -
Further, there were
complaints about wrongful confinement of accomplices and police torture to depose as directed by
police - And further,
the evidence of accomplices was not corroborated by independent witnesses, rather their evidence
contradicted the
prosecution story [see especially para 147] - Therefore, held, their statements are not admissible and
could not have
been used by courts below to corroborate the confessions of accused persons, (2014) 7 SCC 716-J
Criminal Law
Penal Code, 1860
S. 120-B r/w Ss. 302, 307, 121, 123, 124-A and 153-A - Akshardham Temple Attack case - Allegation
that two Urdu
letters written by A-4 were recovered from the pockets of trousers of two fidayeens (terrorist attackers)
who died in said
The Practical Lawyer
http://www.supremecourtcases.com
Eastern Book Company
Generated: Sunday, October 21, 2018
Attack - Recovery of said letters, held, not proved and they could not even be admitted in evidence -
Brigadier Sitapati
(who had signed the letters during seizure) and PW 91 (a Major, who had recovered the letters) not
examined by police
and their S. 161 CrPC statements not recorded - Brigadier Sitapati was not even called to court to
prove his signature -
PW 91 though deposed in court, contradicted the contents of letters as presented by prosecution [see
especially paras
167 and 79] - If evidence of police officer PW 105 is believed, letters were not kept in sealed covers
and photographer
and videographer who recorded the scene of crime were not examined - Both sides contradicted
contents of Gujarati
statement of PW 121 who translated the said letters - Most importantly, the post-mortem report of the
bodies of the two
fidayeens indicated that their entire body and clothes were stained with blood and mud and their
clothes bore multiple
tears and holes due to perforation by bullets - Thus, it is hard to believe that the alleged Urdu letters
were recovered from
their bodies in perfect condition without any tear, soiling or stains of blood - Prosecution pleaded that
letters were found
in a pouch but the list of articles collected from fidayeens did not mention any such pouch - Held,
recovery of said letters
was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and they are not admissible in evidence -, (2014) 7 SCC 716-
K
Criminal Law
Penal Code, 1860
S. 120-B r/w Ss. 302, 307, 121, 123, 124-A and 153-A - Akshardham Temple Attack case - Allegation
that two Urdu
letters written by A-4 were recovered from the pockets of trousers of two fidayeens who died in said
attack - Held,
prosecution could not prove that A-4 wrote the letters - Firstly, prosecution failed to prove that the
letters alleged to have
been written by A-4 were those actually recovered from the bodies (see Shortnote K) - Secondly, PW
89 (handwriting
expert) though stated that the letters were written by A-4, was not absolutely sure and therefore, sent
them to superior
experts - Thirdly, though certificate given by superior handwriting experts agreed with report of PW
89, the defence had
raised objections regarding admissibility of said certificate - Allegedly, certificate of superior
handwriting experts was not
supplied to defence along with charge-sheet and defence came to know about it only when PW 89
deposed in court
regarding same - Therefore, said certificate was taken on record with objection of defence - On said
facts, held,
prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Urdu letters were written by A-4, (2014)
7 SCC 716-L
Criminal Law
Terrorism and Organised Crime
S. 32 - Confession under, retracted afterwards - Retracted confession of A-6, held, not corroborated by
independent
evidence - Prosecution's main reliance for corroboration was a car used by A-6 to carry weapons and
himself, but
prosecution failed to prove that A-6 was the owner of the car - Further, original panchnama of car was
absent - And trial
court admitted evidence of car merely on basis of subsequent panchnama which was only for transfer
of car from Jammu
and Kashmir to Gujarat - Further, A-6 was arrested in connection with a different case in Jammu and
Kashmir and was
brought from there by Gujarat Police (though by following due procedure) - Held, prosecution failed to
adduce any
independent evidence to prove that A-6 used the car to carry weapons from Jammu and Kashmir which
were used in the
attack on Akshardham Temple, (2014) 7 SCC 716-M
Criminal Law
Penal Code, 1860
S. 120-B r/w Ss. 302, 307, 121, 123, 124-A and 153-A - Akshardham Temple Attack case - Statements
of accomplices/
approvers and retracted confessions of accused, held, not corroborated by independent evidence -
There being
allegation of severe police torture both by accused persons and by accomplices/approvers and relevant
defence
witnesses not examined - Besides the statements of accomplices/approvers and retracted confessions,
there being two
Urdu letters allegedly recovered from dead terrorist attackers (allegedly written by A-4) and a blue
Ambassador car
allegedly used by A-6 to carry weapons used in attack - But the said two recoveries being defective
and confessions and
statements were recorded illegally and under extremely suspicious circumstances - Thus, held, there is
no independent
evidence to prove the guilt of the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt in the face of retractions
and grave
allegations of torture and violation of human rights of the accused persons and accomplices/approvers,
(2014) 7 SCC
716-N
Criminal Law
Penal Code, 1860
S. 120-B r/w Ss. 302, 307, 121, 123, 124-A and 153-A - Akshardham Temple Attack case - Criminal
conspiracy, held,
The Practical Lawyer
http://www.supremecourtcases.com
Eastern Book Company
Generated: Sunday, October 21, 2018
not proved against accused persons - Contradiction in version of conspiracy given by each conspirator
- On facts, held,
criminal conspiracy is not proved against A-1 to A-6 beyond reasonable doubt - Though object of
conspiracy was to take
revenge for Godhra Riots there was no proof of meeting of minds and said object as far as A-1 to A-6
are concerned, not
clear in evidence - Though A-2 and A-6 spoke of same set of events, like arranging accommodation
and transporting the
killed terrorist attackers, yet they did not speak about each other's role in planning and execution of
conspiracy -
Undoubtedly, to establish criminal conspiracy, every conspirator need not know the entire chain of
events - But in present
case each accused claimed complete knowledge of the conspiracy, but contradicted other's version of
the same events -
Confessions and statements of accomplices/ approvers did not complete chain of circumstances
leading to offence
rather they contradicted each other, disrupted chain of events and turned their confessions/ statements
into a confusing
story with many discrepancies - Further, there was no independent evidence that inspired confidence to
uphold
conviction of accused persons for alleged conspiracy - All six accused acquitted of all charges, (2014)
7 SCC 716-O
Constitution of India
Arts. 136, 142, 21 and 20(3) - Power of Supreme Court to set aside concurrent convictions - Scope of -
Cases involving
death sentence/cruel and revolting murders/terrorism - Reiterated, Supreme Court can reverse
concurrent convictions by
courts below - Moreover in cases of death sentence (like the present one), it can examine material on
record first hand
unbound by findings of courts below and come to its own conclusion - Apex Court cannot sit with
folded hands when
gross violations of human rights take place or there is perversity in conducting the case at various
stages, in cases such
as the present wherein State was attempting to falsely implicate innocent persons - Furthermore,
Supreme Court can
also set aside concurrent convictions if courts below have not examined the case with more than
ordinary care when the
murders were particularly cruel and revolting, such as in cases of terrorism, as also in present case,
(2014) 7 SCC 716-
P
Constitution of India
Arts. 21, 20(3), 136, 142 and 141 - Akshardham Temple Attack case - Illegal framing of innocent
persons - Concurrent
convictions - Case involving terrorism/cruel and revolting murders - Held, courts below have not
examined the case with
more than ordinary care as laid down in Kashmira Singh, AIR 1952 SC 159 when the murders were
particularly cruel and
revolting, as in present case, thereby requiring the Supreme Court to set aside concurrent convictions -
Held, where the
murders are particularly cruel and revolting, such as in cases involving terrorism, it is necessary to
examine the evidence
with more than ordinary care lest the shocking nature of the crime induce an instinctive reaction
against a dispassionate
judicial scrutiny of the facts and law - In present case, courts below have not examined the case with
more than ordinary
care and therefore, it is a fit case for interference under Art. 136 to reverse concurrent convictions -
Firstly, POTA
Special Court accepted the confessions even though CJM committed illegality in not sending the
accused to judicial
custody after their post-confessional statements before CJM - POTA Special Court accepted the
prosecution plea that no
allegation of police torture was made by confessors and on that basis erroneously held that sending
them to judicial
custody after post-confessional statement under S. 32(5), POTA was not required - Secondly, courts
below mechanically
and without application of mind discarded relevant contentions of defence which are fatal to
prosecution story - Thirdly,
Supreme Court on self-examination of the clothes of fidayeens (terrorist attackers) found them
perforated with bullets and
smeared with dried blood even after 12 yrs of incident, yet the two Urdu letters (which were in perfect
condition) allegedly
recovered from the bodies/ clothes of the killed fidayeens were accepted by courts below - Courts
below accepted and
admitted improbable and impossible facts - Lastly, courts below did not give equal importance to
defence witnesses,
(DWs 1 to 6) which could have thrown light on how police committed atrocities, made illegal
detentions and harassed
innocent persons, (2014) 7 SCC 716-Q
Constitution of India
Arts. 21, 20(3), 136, 142 and 141 - Akshardham Temple Attack case - Illegal framing of innocent
persons - Illegal,
improper and incompetent investigation stringently criticised and deprecated, (2014) 7 SCC 716-R
The Practical Lawyer
http://www.supremecourtcases.com
Eastern Book Company
Generated: Sunday, October 21, 2018

In Adambhai Sulemanbhai Ajmeri v. State of Gujarat, case Hon’ble Apex court exercised its
power under Art 142 Constitution of India, provided relief to one such innocent person, Accused - 1
(A-1) who had served his sentence of 5 years of Rigorous Imprisonment (RI) and preferring not to
appeal against said conviction and sentence - Conviction against A-1 also set aside in exercise of
power under Art. 142 so that he can be absolved of his stigma and is able to return to his family and
society free from suspicion, But Hon’ble Apex Court did not grant any compensation to innocent
persons and also did not form any committee to

In S Nambi Narayanan v. State of Kerala, case Hon’ble Apex court exercised its power under
Art 142 Constitution of India, provided relief rupees 50 lakh to one such innocent person, S Nambi
Narayanan who had served his judicial custody of 50 days of illegal and inhumane torture and
imprisonment for which NHRC also granted rupees 10 lakh seperately but nothing to them who failed
to prefer an appeal against their wrongful prosecution, incarceration, illegal and inhumane torture -
Conviction against A-1 also set aside in exercise of power under Art. 142 so that he can be absolved of
his stigma and is able to return to his family and society free from suspicion, But Hon’ble Apex Court
did not grant any compensation to innocent persons and also did not form any committee
1.
I Comparative study of justice in ancient India and present India
Author makes comparative study of criminal justice administration in India.
(i) Justice in ancient India

Author begins his argument with the illustration from Sinhasan Battisi in which one woman
who was inhabitant of neighbour kingdom to king Vikramaditya, approached in the his
court for justice, she showed an arrow to the king by which her husband was killed. The
arrow was identified from his royal family of the king. King enquired about the arrow to
which it belonged, he himself went to ironsmith who made the arrow who disclosed that
arrow was made for the queen. The queen was immediately taken for custody for fair
investigation. It is to be kept in mind that relationship of husband and wife, supremacy,
highest power and position and royal family status had no place in fairness of
investigation, inquiry, trial and administration of justice. There was no denial but the instant
justice. Mercy appeal was not decided by the sovereign power but by the victim and she
denied and ask for justice by making the queen without her husband, and desired to kill the
 king. She was given the same arrow and the king was before her to be killed by her but she
decided not to kill the king keeping in mind the welfare of kingdom and their all
inhabitants. Victim was compensated by the king himself by her personal labour and
earning, in spite of unwillingness and insult and improper behaviour by victim and her
family, and protected her in laws and saved life of her son from the devil until victim and
members of her family satisfied and became self-dependent & rehabilitated.

(ii) Justice in present India

one STATE SPOSERED criminal acts against people of India are serious concerns for the
legal researchers, thinkers and luminaries in nuance and people of India. The largest
democracy of the world and the dignity of Supreme Court of India worldwide, but still no
check and balance in this regard.
(iii) It has been strictly hitting hard the basic principles and structures of constitution of India. It
is no way democratic when state instead of being a welfare state sponsoring criminal acts
against common people, scientists, intellectuals and teachers working for the nation
consorted, co-operative and various pressure groups of corruptions has been in closed
network which flows from higher level to lower just like water. It shocks us deeply when
High Court of Kerala held and expressed no need of action against the responsible
criminals who supported, protected and safeguarded criminal conspirators of wrongful
prosecution of S Nambi Narayanan, an ISRO scienst in false espionage case.
I Conclusion
It is evident either miscarriage of justice or inefficient and inappropriate justice has been administered
or being administered upon persons like Adambhai, S Nambi Narayanan and many more. List of such
persons are exhaustive. They need to be answered by all of us, particularly by investigating agencies
and controller thereof, legislatures, judges and finally by the state & central governments. The author,
in this context, argues & feels need for more study & research. The author finds following
recommendations to the government for providing complete justice to innocent persons wrongfully
prosecuted and further check & balance to prosecute innocent persons wrongfully.
The recommendations are as follows;
1. Comprehensive skill development programme for police & investigation agencies, judicial
magistrates and judges. Responsibilities, accountabilities of them and punishments in default
thereof. Improvement in police to population ratio, judicial magistrates to population ratio and
judges to population ratio. Fulfil vacant posts in the aforesaid departments immediately.
2. Departmental action
3. Legal action- civil and criminal both
4. Compensation from the responsible persons and the governments
5. Amendments in departmental rules & byelaws, enactments of new acts, amendments in criminal
law and constitution of India for the welfare and complete justice to persons wrongfully
prosecuted, being prosecuted wrongfully and initiation of wrongful prosecution. Thus, we
constitute India as the preamble of the constitution indicates.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. S Nambi Narayanan v. State of Kerala, decided by the Supreme Court on September 24, 2018
2. Adambhai Sulemanbhai v. State of Gujrat, (2014) 7 SCC 716, May 16, 2014
3. Babloo Chauhan @ Dabloo, decided by High Court of Delhi, May 16, 2014
4. report by Dr. G S Bajpeyi, amicus Curie, Professor & Registrar, NLU Delhi, final decision by
the Hon’ble Delhi High Court on May 16, 2014
5. 277th report by Law C0mmission of India
6. panel discussion wrongful prosecution (miscarriage of justice) by NLU at India International
Centre, New Delhi on May 16, 2014
7. The author finds development as start or beginning of issue, thus, certainly incom