Mahesh Grover, J.@mdashThis judgment will dispose of the above mentioned two petitions as both of them relate to one incident, i.e., the custodial death of Chhajju Ram, husband of Smt. Khello Devi, resident of Village Manakwas, Tehsil Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani, presently residing at House No. 4/54, Ward No. 4, Arjun Nagar, Rewari.
(1) Crl. Misc. Petition No. 54333-M of 2005-Smt. Khello Devi v. State of Haryana and others.
2. The petitioner has filed this petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter described as `the Cr.P.C.'') for issuance of directions to respondent nos. 1 to 3 to register a criminal case under Sections 364, 302, 201, 218 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, `the I.P.C.'') against respondent nos. 4 to 12; for entrusting the investigation thereof to some independent agency, like Central Bureau of Investigation (for brevity, `the C.B.I.'') and for awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.5 lacs to her. Crl.Misc.No.70217-M of 2005 is also being disposed of along with the instant petition as the same arise out of a complaint sent by the petitioner of which cognizance was taken by this Court and was treated a petition on judicial side keeping in view the allegations similar to the one being mentioned hereinunder.
Crl. Misc. Petition No. 70217-M of 2005 Smt. Khello Devi v. Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari.
3. A complaint endorsed to Hon''ble the Chief Justice by Smt. Khello Devi about non-conducting of enquiry into the custodial death of her husband by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari, was treated as a criminal miscellaneous petition to be dealt on judicial side of this Court.
4. The facts giving rise to these petitions, which are being extracted from Crl. Misc. Petition No. 54333-M of 2005, are as under :-
The petitioner is the widow of Chhajju Ram, since deceased, who was an Ex- servicemen and originally resident of village Manak was, Tehsil Charkhi Dadri, District Bhiwani, but had shifted to Rewari and started living at House No. 4/54, Ward No. 4, Arjun Nagar, Rewari for the last about 10-12 years and is mother of a married daughter-Sunita and two sons, namely, Anil (married), aged 21 years and Mukesh, aged 19 years, a student. On 14.7.2005, the daughter of Sunita, namely, Saneha, aged about 8 months, was to be operated upon at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, Delhi and, therefore, she along with her husband, son-Anil and daughter-in-law, Pinky, had gone to Delhi in the morning in order to remain present at the time of operation and had come back to Rewari at about 4.00 P.M. After their arrival, they came to know that at about 9.00 A.M. on that day, respondent nos. 4 to 7 ( all police officials) along with other officials had taken away Mukesh from the house despite the fact that no case was registered against him nor was he involved in any criminal matter. Just after their arrival, respondent nos. 4 to 7 along with other police officials raided the house of the petitioner and took her husband and son-Anil along with them. The motor cycle of her husband bearing registration no. HR36E-5578 was also taken away by the police officials and while leaving, they had disconnected the telephone installed at the residence. Chhajju Ram was given beatings by respondent nos. 4 to 7 at C.I.A. Staff, Rewari resulting in serious injuries to him and they killed him, while Mukesh and Anil were kept in illegal detention. No case was registered either against Chhajju Ram or Anil and Mukesh on 14.7.2005. On the same day, respondent nos. 4 to 7 and other officials, after killing Chhajju Ram, had taken away his dead body in a government gypsy from the premises of C.I.A. Staff, Rewari between 5.00 or 6.00 P.M. The beatings to Chhaju Ram were given by respondent nos. 4 to 7 in the view of his sons, namely, Anil and Mukesh.
5. At about 7.00 P.M., Mukesh and Anil were made to sign two papers in C.I.A. Staff, Rewari under coercion telling them that they had to state that their father had gone out of his house for some work for two days and as soon as he comes back, they would produce him before the police. Even some blank papers were also got signed from them.
6. Mukesh and Anil were taken to Civil Hospital, Rewari around 9.00 P.M. On 14.7.2005 in a gypsy and were kept in the gypsy for 2-3 hours. At that time, both of them came to know that dead body of their father was kept in the premises of Civil Hospital, Rewari and a number of police officials were present there.
7. At about 10.00 or 11.00 P.M., Mukesh and Anil were taken out of the gypsy and were produced before Shri Sujan Singh, the then Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Rewari (respondent no.11) and Shri Pat Ram, the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, Rewari (respondent no.12) and both of them were told that their father had died of a heart attack and they would take the dead body next morning after the post mortem examination. Their signatures were also obtained on some blank papers by respondent nos. 11 and 12.
8. On 15.7.2005, at 8.00 A.M., a Board of Doctors, consisting of Dr. P.D. Mehra, Dr. J.K. Saini and Dr. Ashok Saini (respondent nos. 8 to 10) performed post mortem examination on the dead body of Chhajju Ram. Since the post mortem was conducted under pressure of respondent nos. 11 and 12 to save respondent nos. 4 to 7, a false report was got prepared from respondent nos. 8 to 10, who had not mentioned even a single injury on the dead body of Chhajju Ram and the case of death was given as under:-
In our opinion, cause of death will be given after receiving report from (1) Chemical Examiner, Karnal, (2) Histo Pathology Report from HOD, Department of Pathology, Pt. BDS PGIMMS, Rohtak of various viceras sent.
9. Since Chhajju Ram was given severe beatings within the view of his sons on 14.7.2005 in the premises of C.I.A. Staff, Rewari and the doctors had not shown any injury on his person while performing post mortem examination, Karan Singh, his younger brother, moved an application on 15.7.2005 before the Deputy Commissioner, Rewari intimating him that the post mortem examination was not conducted by the Board of Doctors properly and the report was prepared under the influence of respondent nos. 11 and 12. A request for getting second post mortem examination done was made in the said application. On that application, an order was made for second post mortem on the dead body of Chhajju Ram to be performed at PGIMS, Rohtak on 15.7.2005 itself. The post mortem examination at Rohtak was conducted between 4.15 P.M. to 5.15 P.M. On 15.7.2005 and as per the report, the following injuries were found on the dead body of Chhajju Ram :-
1. A diffused reddish contusion of size 12.5 x 6.5 cm situated over the top of head along coronal place at a level 8 cm above globeela. It was 2 cm away from midline on the right side and 10.5 cm on the left side. On dissection Elchymosis was seen in the layer of the scalp with pesicionid infiltration of blood underneath the described injury.
2. A diffused reddish contusion of size 6 x 3 cm situated over left side of parieto occipital area of scalp, situated 10 cm. And behind left pinna x 4 cm from the midline. On dissection, occhymosis was seen in the layers of the scalp with pericsonial infiltration of blood underneath the described injury.
3. A diffused reddish contusion of size 8 x 3 cm situated over the left temporal region of scalp 6 cm posterior to lateral and of left supra orbital margin and just above the pinna, being 14 cm away from midline. On dissection, occhymosis was seen in the layers of the scalp with parieonial infiltration of blood underneath the described injury. On dissection of the urenium deuromatter was found to be dissected in the frontal region (vide supra). Elsewhere it was intact. On further dissection, diffused sub-dural hemorrhage was seen over whole of the left cerebral hemisphere.
4. A reddish contusion of size 2 x 1 cm over the right suitun in its lower part. On dissection, underlying tissues be ecchymosis.
10. The above injuries were ante-mortem in nature caused by hard and blunt object. The cause of death was opined as under:-
The dead body is of a middle aged male individual. The definite cause of death would be opined after receipt of result of chemical analysis of vicera and result of histopathological examination of the heart as reportedly the viscera have been preserved for chemical analysis and heart for histopathological examination by the Board of Doctors of G.H., Rewari during the previous post mortem.
11. The report of the second post mortem revealed that Chhajju Ram had died a homicidal death on account of injuries sustained by him at the hands of respondent nos. 4 to 7 in the premises of C.I.A. Staff, Rewari on 14.7.2005 and respondent nos. 11 and 12 had got prepared a false post mortem report from respondent nos. 8 to 10 in order to destroy the evidence of commission of offence (custodial death). The dead body of Chhajju Ram was cremated on 16.7.2005. Thus, a conspiracy was alleged to have been hatched by respondent no. 4 to 12 and Chhaju Ram was shown to have died a natural death on account of a heart attack, although he was in custody.
12. Anil, son of the petitioner had moved an application before the Deputy Commissioner, Rewari on 15.7.2005 for taking an action against respondent nos. 4 to 12, but to no avail. A complaint was also made to the Chief Minister, Haryana for taking necessary action against the culprits, but nothing was done. The applications were also made to several higher officials along with affidavit of the petitioner, but all in vain.
13. To show the mala fides of respondents, the petitioner has also mentioned that Anil Kumar, her son, was involved in a case registered vide F.I.R. No. 36 dated 8.7.2005 u/s 395 of the I.P.C. and Section 25 of the Arms Act,1959 at Police Station, Bond Kalan, District Bhiwani. However, the name of Anil Kumar does not find mentioned in the said F.I.R.
14. On the basis of the above facts, the petitioner has made the prayer noticed hereinabove.
In Crl. Misc. Petition No. 54333-M of 2005, notice of motion was issued on 29.9.2005 to the Advocate General, Haryana.
15. Reply on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 3 was filed by Sukhbir Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kosli. It was stated therein that the petitioner has concealed a vital fact from the Court as a magisterial enquiry into the circumstances leading to the death of Chhajju Ram has already been ordered by the District Magistrate, Rewari and the same is being conducted by Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari. It has been averred that the petitioner has concocted the whole story and in fact, a hardened criminal, namely, Vinod Kumar was in police custody after a shoot-out and he had disclosed during interrogation that Chhajju Ram had acted as a mediator and had assisted him in procuring hand-grenade to Sunder, resident of Titoli, who had been killed in a police encounter in District Panipat. It was also averred that Vinod Kumar had further disclosed that Chhajju Ram had taken commission from the members of his gang in lieu of getting arranged the arms and also used to provide shelter to them. On the basis of this disclosure, the police officials had gone to the house of Chhajju Ram to serve a notice u/s 160 of the Cr.P.C. and the same was duly acknowledged by his sons. Pursuant to that notice, Chhajju Ram had appeared before respondent no.4, when he was present in General Hospital, Rewari on 14.7.2005 in connection with investigation of F.I.R. No. 48 of Police Station, Jatusana. He was not aware of the disclosure statement made by Vinod Kumar, who was also in the hospital in police custody. When both of them were confronted with each other, Chhajju Ram went in to a state of shock and at about 5.40 P.M., when question regarding sale of AK-47 was put by Vinod Kumar to him, he fell down on the floor and his head struck the rear wall and the floor. The said occurrence was witnessed by Dr. P.D. Mehra, Miss Kamla Dua, Staff Nurse and Dalip Singh, attendant. They even tried to provide some first aid to Chhajju Ram, but could not save him and he died. The factum of the post mortem having been conducted by the Board of Directors at Civil Hospital, Rewari was not disputed. It was denied if the signatures of the sons of Chhajju Ram were taken on any blank papers. It was averred that the second post mortem examination was conducted on the request of the sons of Chhajju Ram. The receipt of various complaints was admitted, but it was averred that the legal action would be taken after the conclusion of magisterial enquiry.
16. It was stated that the name of Anil Kumar son of Chhajju Ram had been disclosed by Vinod Kumar in a disclosure statement on 17.7.2005 during the investigation of F.I.R. No. 48 dated 14.7.2005 was registered at Police Station, Jatusana that he was in possession of some property looted in the course of dacoity regarding which an F.I.R. was registered at Police Station, Bond, District Bhiwani and Anil Kumar was accordingly arrested in that case.
17. Respondent no. 4 has also filed a separate reply and he has reiterated more or less the averments made in the reply filed by respondent nos. 1 to 3.
18. On 7.8.2008, this Court directed the doctors, who are impleaded as respondent nos. 8 to 10 to file their affidavits explaining their conduct as to how they did not detect the injuries which were found in the second post mortem examination conducted by the doctors at PGIMS, Rohtak.
19. In their separate affidavits, respondent nos. 8 to 10 have averred that when they conducted the post mortem examination, there was no injury on the dead body of Chhajju Ram, who had died on account of heart attack and they do not agree with the findings of the second post mortem examination. They have further stated that in the enquiry conducted by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari, statements of fifteen witnesses were recorded and it has been opined that Chhajju Ram died due to heart disease and there was no injury on the dead body. It has also been stated that as per histopathological report, Chhajju Ram was found to be suffering from complicated atherosclerosis (coronary artery disease of right and left coronary arteries). Besides, they have stated about their experience and medical education.
20. Pursuant to order dated 20.8.2008, Dr. Luv Sharma, Associate Professor, Department of Forensic Medicine, Pt. B.D.S. PGIMS, Rohtak, who had conducted the second post mortem on the dead body of Chhajju Ram, also filed his affidavit. He stated about the injuries found on the dead body and which have been extracted above. Besides, he averred that he was called to participate in an enquiry held by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari in connection with the magisterial inquiry of the death of Chhajju Ram. It was further averred that subsequently, he was asked by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rewari to opine about the cause of death of Chhajju Ram on the basis of the histo-pathological report and the chemical examiner''s report and on the basis of those reports, he had opined the cause of death of complicated atherosclerosis of right and left coronary arteries (i.e. coronary artery disease) diagnosed histo-pathologically could be the cumulative effect of injuries described in the post mortem report (S.Nos. 1 to 4) over the compromised heart due to complicated coronary artery disease. In response to a further query by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rewari as to whether a person with complicated coronary artery disease could die due to neurogenic shock or not, he had replied that a person with complicated atherosclerosis of right and left coronary arteries (i.e. coronary artery disease) in addition to injuries sustained may or may not suffer neurogenic shock and die and the possibility of such a patient dying from neurogenic shock cannot be ruled out. He also stated that the injuries described in the second post mortem report were ante mortem in nature. Paragraphs 7 and 8 of his affidavit, which are relevant, are reproduced below :-
7. That in my opinion, the injuries described in the second post mortem report were ante mortem in nature. However, as delayed bruising is a well known phenomenon and as all the injuries described over the head were bruises (contusions) the possibility of delayed bruising in this case cannot be ruled out as the second post mortem was done around 24 hours of the death of the patient and appearance of bruise takes some time to appear. This may be the case in the scrotal injury described.
8. That post mortem artifacts (changes on the body which develop after the death or during the autopsy) may mimic as ante mortem contusions of the scalp and sub dural haemorrhage of the brain in may cases. These artifacts also include those created by lifting, handling and transportation of the dead body from one place to other. It is also true that one can confuse between ante mortem and post mortem bruises.
On 23.3.2009, this Court, after taking note of medical evidence on record and other related facts, directed that the investigation be conducted by a team consisting of a gazetted officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, an officer from the Crime Branch, Haryana of the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police or Superintendent of Police and another local police officer of Police Station, City Rewari. The matter was ordered to be looked into under the supervision of the Superintendent of Police, Rewari.
21. The findings of the team so constituted have been placed on record along with the statements of the witnesses examined by it and according to the conclusion arrived at in the report, the death of Chhajju Ram was a result of shock coupled with coronary artery disease and nothing has surfaced on record to suggest that the deceased was given any physical blows prior to his death.
22. In Crl. Misc. Petition No. 70217-M of 2005, notice of motion was issued to Advocate General, Haryana, Deputy Commissioner, Rewari, Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari (Inquiry Officer) and Randhir Singh, Inspector.
23. In his reply to this petition, Shri Nitin Kumar Yadav, Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari stated that the enquiry is still pending and he was transferred from Rewari and joined as Deputy Commissioner, Yamuna Nagar and that vide order dated 5.4.2007, the Deputy Commissioner, Rewari has appointed the present Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari as the enquiry officer in the case.
24. The Deputy Commissioner, Rewari, in his separate reply, averred that the magisterial enquiry was entrusted to Shri Nitin Kumar Yadav, Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari vide orders dated 15.7.2005; that on 9.12.2005, the petitioner had presented a written complaint to him that the enquiry was not being conducted in a fair and impartial manner and she requested that the enquiry may not be got conducted from the concerned officer; that he, vide letter dated 9.1.2006, had informed the petitioner to put her version before the enquiry officer; that Shri Nitin Kumar Yadav was transferred from Rewari and that the enquiry was entrusted to his successor - Shri S.S. Dalal vide order dated 5.4.2007 and that Shri Dalal has since submitted his report vide memo dated 29.6.2007 after concluding the enquiry.
25. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.
The above detailed facts which have been set out, clearly reveal a very disconcerting aspect of a criminal investigative process resorted to by respondents, which is also a clear manifestation of a serious attempt to scuttle the truth, rather than unravel it. The facts also reveal most disturbing phenomena of the officials belonging to the medical profession trying to protect their fraternity by giving opinions which have tended to create confused fluidity in the situation, rather than help concertize findings which could have enabled the Court to conclude positively in favour of actual happenings.
26. The injuries on the person of the deceased show (i) a reddish contusion of 12.5 x 6.5 cm size situated over the tope of head along coronal place at a level of 8 cm. above globeela, 2 cm. away from mid line on the right side and 10.5 cm. on the left side; (ii) contusion of the size of 6 x 3 cms. over the left side of parieto occipital area of scalp, situated 10 cm. and behind left pinna x 4 cm. From the mid line; (iii) contusion of size 8 x 3 cm. Situated over the left temporal region of scalp 6 cm. posterior to lateral and of left supra orbital margin and just above the pinna and 14 cm. away from mid line; and (iv) contusion of the size of 2 x 1 cm. over the right suitun in its lower part. All these injuries were ante mortem in nature caused by a hard and blunt weapon. This was established from the opinion given by Dr. Luv Sharma in the first instance while recording 2nd post mortem report
27. The reason of death which is now being given out by the investigating team is that the deceased, on being confronted with a hardened criminal, who was stated to be his accomplice, and was in the hospital, suffered a heart attack and collapsed and in the process, hit against the wall and sustained injuries.
28. The Court is not, at all, convinced and enamoured with the explanation that has been given out. If a person suffers a heart attack and falls down while hitting the wall, then, it is most likely that he or a part of his body would hit the wall at one place and he will slither down along the wall, but he would not be having injuries on all portions of his head, i.e., temporal, parietal, top of the head along with coronal place, parietal occipital area etc. Strangely enough, in the subsequent affidavit which has been filed by the very same doctor, i.e, Dr. Luv Sharma, he tried to explain these injuries after having conducted the second post mortem as "delayed bruising".
29. This opinion was given because the other doctors, namely, Dr. J.K. Saini, Dr. Ashok Saini and Dr. P.D. Mehra, had stated that they did not notice any injury on the person of the deceased at the time of conducting first post mortem. These doctors did not even notice even a single injury on the body of Chhajju Ram, which is totally at variance with the second post mortem report.
30. The death is also said to have taken place in the hospital in the presence of doctors. A very unnatural aspect of the matter is that there is no material gathered by the Special Investigating Team from the doctors concerned as to what steps they took when they saw a person who is concededly in the custody of the police collapsing right under their eyes. Whether they made any attempt to revive him or whether immediate medical help was given to him is not established. This leaves gaping holes which cannot lightly be wished away and causes a deep concern about the authenticity of the version given out by the respondents. The aspect assumes great significance because the doctors by training are required to react in such a situation to save a life.
31. Prima facie, this Court is convinced that these doctors had connived first to give a wrong report of not noticing any injury and then by trying to cover up their tracks by saying that it is a case of delayed bruising and also by misleading the investigation completely to say that the death was caused only on account of heart attack and not on account of any injury. It is possible that the death might have been caused by a heart attack, but equally possible is the fact that brutal injuries found on the person of the deceased could have triggered the heart attack. In any eventuality, it was the solemn duty of the doctors to have ascertained the cause of death and also their duty to delineate the injuries in the first instance.
32. The investigating team also seems to be more intent in covering the tracks of their fellow brethren, who were probably involved in causing injuries to the deceased, who was admittedly in their custody.
33. Another most intriguing aspect is that the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari, who was entrusted with the magisterial enquiry, completely floundered by not submitting the report and virtually pushing it under the carpet which attempt, at best, indicates an unholy nexus between the officials of the administration and the officials of the police. Shri Nitin Yadav, I.A.S., Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari, who initiated the enquiry on 15.7.2005, did not submit the findings of the enquiry to the District Magistrate, Rewari till he was transferred out and relinquished charge on 8.1.2007. The shocking state of affairs is revealed from the communication dated 29.6.2007 received from the office of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari which shows the manner in which the enquiry was handled by the said officer - Shri Nitin Yadav. The relevant portions of the aforesaid communication are extracted below :-
Thereafter, the SDM, Rewari sent the communication to doctor Luv Sharma for his final opinion about cause of death of the deceased, through letter No. 1027 dated 21/12/2005 and letter No. SPL/1/2006/Steno dated 12.-04/2006, Dr. Luv Sharma submitted the following reply to the above mentioned communication :
`The histopathological report No. PATH/05/2086 dated 2/8/2005 and chemical examiner''s result no. 519 P Dt. 28/10/2005 was brought along with this request for subsequent opinion regarding cause of death in this case. The histopathological report showed the Rt & Lt coronary arteries having complicated atherosclerosis (i.e. Coronary arteries disease) whereas the chemical examination report indicated negative test for common poison including ethyl alcohol. Therefore, keeping in view the Post Mortem Report No. PME/05/07/16 dated 15/07/05, the afore-mentioned histopathological report of heart and chemical examiner report, I am of the opinion that the cause of death in this case of complicated atherosclerosis of Rt & Lt coronary arteries (i.e. Coronary artery disease) diagnosed histopathology could be the cumulative effect of the injuries described in the Post Mortem report (Sr. no. 1 to 4) over to the compromised heart due to complicated coronary artery disease.
The cause of death of the deceased Chajju Ram has already been opined vide my subsequent opinion dated 24-12- 05. However, a person with complicated atherosclerosis of Rt & Lt coronary arteries ( i.e. Coronary arteries disease) in addition to injuries sustained, may or may not suffer neurogenic shock and die. So the possibility of such a patient dying of neurogenic shock can not be ruled out.''
In this case, the appropriate enquiry was conducted by the SDM, Rewari under the provisions of Cr.P.C., however, the DM, Rewari, vide its communication No. 1391-94/PA dated 15-07-2005 suo moto issued the order for a further magisterial enquiry, whereas the magisterial enquiry was conducted by the SDM,Rewari and report to the same already submitted to the DM, Rewari. In this Mr. Nitin Kumar Yadav, IAS, the then ADC, Rewari was appointed as the Enquiry Report.
Mr. Nitin Kumar, IAS, the then ADC started the enquiry and recorded the statements of 15 witnesses and concluded the recording of statements of witnesses on 30-11-2005. Mr. Nitin Kumar did not file the findings of the enquiry to the DM, Rewari till he got transferred and relinquished the charge on dated 08-01-2007.
xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx
xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx
On next day dated 5-4-2007 the DM Rewari sent other communications to the ADC, Rewari saying that ADC Rewari will conduct the enquiry, henceforth and submit a report within a week. In this case, the enquiry was already concluded and closed by Mr. Nitin Kumar Yadav, IAS long back on 30-11- 2005 and he was only to submit the findings to the DM which he did not do for a long period about one & half year. The reply was sent to the DM on 27/04/2007, however, vide communication dated 23/05/2007, the DM Rewari further directed to the ADC, Rewari to submit the report with clear findings and reason immediately. Hence this report is submitted with the clarification that in this case the statement of all the witnesses was recorded by Mr.Nitin Kumar Yadav, IAS and last statement was recorded on 30-11-2005, however, he did not submit the report with clear findings and reasons. Hence I am submitting the same on the perusal of the enquiry conducted by Mr. Nitin Kumar Yadav, IAS, the then ADC, Rewari & now DC, Yamuna Nagar.
That on perusal of statements of all the 15 witnesses and Post Mortem Report and chemical report and Histopathology Report and also on the perusal of enquiry report submitted by SDM Rewari under the provisions of Section 176 Cr.P.C. there seems to be a probability that Mr. Chajju Ram while interacting with Mr. Vinod Kumar Ward No.9 of General Hospital, Rewari collapsed suddenly due to cardiac arrest and the doctors in the Hospital could not save him despite the best medical assistance and the same is corroborated with the opinion given by the doctors in the Post Mortem Report.
Report is submitted to Ld.DC, Rewari for perusal and further necessary action." (emphasis supplied).
34. The Court also expresses its deem sense of anguish that death of a citizen has been treated in such an apathetic manner as has been done by Shri Nitin Kumar Yadav, the then Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari as he slept over the matter and did not submit the enquiry report for almost sixteen to seventeen months till he was transferred and relinquished the charge on 8.1.2007 without doing anything in the matter. It is more shocking that this has happened despite the fact that the petitioner was pursuing the instant petition before this Court.
35. The aforementioned facts leave no room for doubt in the mind of the Court that the attempts of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari - Shri Nitin Kumar Yadav, the police officials and the doctors reveal the existence of an unholy triumvirate, which was intent on the covering the tracks of truth with tar with each one of them trying to outwit the other in the process.
36. A magisterial enquiry was the first to be ordered and it is expected to be a quick and a prompt response to a grave situation, which alacrity should be reciprocated by such a magistrate by returning his findings. He cannot show laxity, much less lethargy and indifference as has been done in the present case.
37. As a result of the above discussion, Crl. Misc. Petition No. 54333-M of 2005 is accepted, respondent nos. 1 to 3 are directed to register a criminal case against respondent nos. 4 to 12 under the relevant provisions of the I.P.C. and the further investigation in the case is ordered to be carried out by the C.B.I., because the Special Investigation Team has failed to carry out a convincing investigation. The C.B.I. shall take the entire material pertaining to the instant case into its possession immediately. The Standing Counsel for the C.B.I. in this Court be given intimation with regard to this order.
38. Simultaneously, it is directed that appropriate proceedings against Shri Nitin Kumar Yadav, the then Additional Deputy Commissioner, Rewari be immediately initiated for showing such a laxity in the matter which ought to have been granted utmost priority since it involved death of an individual in police custody and even if it is assumed that the deceased was an offender or violator of law, even then the rights accorded to him by the Constitution of India could not have been throttled in the manner as has been done. The result of such proceedings be placed before the Court for its perusal within three months.
39. In the given set of circumstances when the Court is prima facie convinced that Chhajju Ram died while in police custody, due to injuries which are unexplained, the State of Haryana through Chief Secretary and Deputy Commissioner, Rewari is directed to pay immediately an interim compensation of Rs. Five lacs to the petitioner.
40. Crl. Misc. Petition No. 70217-M of 2005 is disposed of in view of the above directions.
