Content Provider | Supreme Court of India |
---|---|
e-ISSN | 30484839 |
Language | English |
Access Restriction | NDLI |
Subject Keyword | CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973 |
Content Type | Text |
Resource Type | Law Judgement |
Jurisdiction | India |
Act(s) Referred | Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) |
Case(s) Referred | Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 |
Case Type | Appeal |
Court | Supreme Court of India |
Disposal Nature | Appeal Dismissed |
Headnote | CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973s. 227-Application for discharge-Mumbai riots- Suleman Bakery incident of 9.1.1993-Miscreants from rooftop of Suleman Bakery firing shots and pelting stones, bottles and acid bulbs towards police picket set up opposite to it-Wireless message sent to control room-Joint Commissioner of Police (R-1) reached the spot with Special Operations Squads and ordered to arrest the miscreants-In the process twelve persons got injured and eight died-After riots subsided, Commission of Inquiry set up on complaints against police force - In the instant case, FIR lodged against 18 police personnel for offences punishable u/ss. 302/34 and 307/34-They filed application for their discharge-Trial court ordered discharge of the nine respondents - High Court confirmed the order in revision-Held: The miscreants were firing from the rooftop of Suleman Bakery - The trial court relied on the statements of the inmates and held that the police did not enter the building with the intention to kill the inmates - Even after the entry some of the policemen did not fire a single bullet, they were clearly acting in discharge of their duty and, therefore, entitled to the protection u/s 161 of the Bombay Police Act - The trial court found that there was no justifiable case against the police officials who even in the volatile situation did not open fire at all - The High Court also examined the truthfulness of the statements and the documents and rejected the revision against the order of discharge passed by the trial court - In the circumstances there is no reason to take a different view than the one which has been taken by the High Court - Bombay Police Act - s.161.Criminal Law:Criminal trespass - Common intention - Common object B - Mumbai riots -Suleman Bakery incident - Miscreants firing from the rooftop other building at the police picket - Wireless message sent to control room - Joint Commissioner of Police reached the spot with Special Operations Squads (SO) -Ordered to arrest the miscreants - When in spite of orders, door of building was not opened by inmates, door ordered to be broken open - In the process, twelve persons got injured and other eight succumbed to injuries - HELD: It cannot be disputed that situation in Mumbai on 9.1.1993 was extremely volatile - This. was evident from the very existence of picket D . in front of Suleman Bakery- Miscreants were firing at police picket - Wireless message was sent to Control room and on that basis SOS led by Joint Commissioner of Police (R-1) reached the place - When orders to open the door of the building were not paid any heed, R-1 was perfectly justified E in directing to break open the front door of the building and the police personnel had to enter - Therefore, entry could not . amount to trespass or criminal trespass - There cannot be any dispute that the members of SOS had duty to quell the riots - Therefore, SOS cannot be said to be an unlawful assembly - ·Under such circumstances, if in that volatile situation some of the police personnel did not fire a single bullet, they cannot be made vicariously liable for the acts of some others which acts are not shown to be with a common intention or common object of killing the people - The trial G court and the revisional court have rightly taken the view that there could be no common intention shared on the part of those who did not fire a single bullet. Commission of Inquiry:Report of Commission - Evidentiary value of - HELD: The observations and findings in the report of the Commission are only meant for the information of the Government - The courts are not bound by the finding of the Commission of Inquiry and they have to arrive at their own decision on the evidence placed before them in accordance with law. |
Judge | Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.S. Sirpurkar |
Neutral Citation | 2011 INSC 438 |
Petitioner | Noorul Huda Maqbool Ahmed |
Respondent | Ram Deo Tyagi & Ors. |
SCR | [2011] 7 S.C.R. 782 |
Judgement Date | 2011-07-04 |
Case Number | 1256 |
National Digital Library of India (NDLI) is a virtual repository of learning resources which is not just a repository with search/browse facilities but provides a host of services for the learner community. It is sponsored and mentored by Ministry of Education, Government of India, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT). Filtered and federated searching is employed to facilitate focused searching so that learners can find the right resource with least effort and in minimum time. NDLI provides user group-specific services such as Examination Preparatory for School and College students and job aspirants. Services for Researchers and general learners are also provided. NDLI is designed to hold content of any language and provides interface support for 10 most widely used Indian languages. It is built to provide support for all academic levels including researchers and life-long learners, all disciplines, all popular forms of access devices and differently-abled learners. It is designed to enable people to learn and prepare from best practices from all over the world and to facilitate researchers to perform inter-linked exploration from multiple sources. It is developed, operated and maintained from Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur.
Learn more about this project from here.
NDLI is a conglomeration of freely available or institutionally contributed or donated or publisher managed contents. Almost all these contents are hosted and accessed from respective sources. The responsibility for authenticity, relevance, completeness, accuracy, reliability and suitability of these contents rests with the respective organization and NDLI has no responsibility or liability for these. Every effort is made to keep the NDLI portal up and running smoothly unless there are some unavoidable technical issues.
Ministry of Education, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT), has sponsored and funded the National Digital Library of India (NDLI) project.
Sl. | Authority | Responsibilities | Communication Details |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education |
Sanctioning Authority | https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives |
2 | Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project | https://www.iitkgp.ac.in |
3 | National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project | Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in |
4 | Project PI / Joint PI | Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project |
Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon |
5 | Website/Portal (Helpdesk) | Queries regarding NDLI and its services | support@ndl.gov.in |
6 | Contents and Copyright Issues | Queries related to content curation and copyright issues | content@ndl.gov.in |
7 | National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club) | Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach | clubsupport@ndl.gov.in |
8 | Digital Preservation Centre (DPC) | Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books | dpc@ndl.gov.in |
9 | IDR Setup or Support | Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops | idr@ndl.gov.in |