Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Dalbir Singh Rana son of Sh. Jagdish Singh, aged about 57 years,
Ex. Superintendent, Model Jail, Chandigarh, R/O 281, Sector
22A, Chandigarh.
2.
3.
4.
Inder Singh son of Sh. Hawa Singh, aged about 47 years, Ex.
Warder, Model Jail, Chandigarh, r/o village Bad Sikari, PS
Kalayat, District Kaithal, Haryana.
5.
6.
7.
Nissan Singh Son of Sh. Baru Ram, aged about 55 years, Ex.
Head Warder, Model Jail, Chandigarh, R/O village Khizrabad,
PS Kurali, District Ropar, Punjab.
8.
9.
Ved Mitter Gill son of Sh. Bhalle Ram, aged about 66 years, Ex.
Deputy Superintendent, Model Jail, Chandigarh, r/o V.
Khizrabad, District Mohali, Punjab.
11.
Subeg Singh son of Sh. Sewa Singh, aged about 45 years, r/o
village Surrol, PS Sadar, Rajpura, District Patiala, Punjab.
12.
Nand Singh son of Sh. Khushal Singh, aged about 38 years, r/o
Village Surrol, PS Sadar, Rajpura, District Patiala, Punjab.
13.
Sher Singh son of Sh. Gurbax Singh, aged about 53 years, r/o
Village Ror, PS Safiddon, District Jind, Haryana.
14.
15.
16.
Gurnam Singh son of Sh. Gian Singh, aged about 55 years, r/o
village Hajipur, PS Julkan, District Patiala, Punjab.
17.
18.
Jagtar Singh Hawara son of Sh. Sher Singh, r/o village Hawara,
PS Khamano, District Fatehgarh Sahib, Punjab.
19.
Jagtar Singh Tara son of Sh. Sadhu Singh, r/o House No.226/3,
Arjun Nagar, New Delhi, Permanent resident of village Dekwala,
PS Sadar, Ropar, Punjab. (Already declared proclaimed
offender now proceedings separated).
20.
Paramjit Singh Bheora son of Sh. Jagjit Singh, R/O House No.B50, Vishwakarma Park, Lakshmi Nagar, Delhi, Permanent
Resident of Village Bheora, PS Sadar, Ropar, Punjab.
21.
22.
23.
PW2
PW3.
PW4
PW5/A
PW6
PW7
PW8
PW9
PW10
PW11
PW12
PW13
PW16
PW17
PW18
PW19
PW20
PW21
PW22
PW23
PW24
PW25
PW27
PW28
PW29
PW30
PW31
PW32
also posted as
PW34
Head
constable
Nirmal
Singh
who
joined
PW36
PW37
PW38
PW39
Gurmukh
Singh,
retired
Sr.
Assistant,
Jail
PW41
PW42
PW43
PW44
PW45
PW46
PW47
PW48
PW49
PB10U-1957.
PW50
Administration
granting
sanction
to
launch
Administration
granting
sanction
to
launch
Administration
granting
sanction
to
launch
issued
by
Home
Department
of
Chandigarh
Ex
Administration
granting
sanction
to
launch
issued
by
Home
Department
of
Chandigarh
Administration
granting
sanction
to
launch
mention and recognize the efforts of learned APP SH. J.P. Singh
in diligently handling the case and assisting the Court as the
Prosecutor and not a persecutor. He has been able to bring out best
out of the witnesses, attempting to fill up the deficiencies in
investigation.
8. Brief facts as put up in the police report are that accused Jagtar
Singh Hawara, Jagtar Singh Tara and Paramjit Singh Bheora were
facing trial in Beant Singh murder cases titled State Vs Gurmeet
Singh etc. and State Vs Paramjit Singh Bheora in case FIR
(RC) No.9(S)/95-STU.V u/s 302, 307 IPC, 25/27/54/59 of Arms
Act and 3,4,5 of Explosive Substances Act, PS CBI/SIC New
Delhi and were in custody in Model Jail, Chandigarh. Movement
of the accused in Beant Singh murder case was restricted within
the premises of Model Jail, Burail, Chandigarh as per Notification
issued by the Chandigarh Administration u/s 268 of Cr.P.C.
Model Jail, Chandigarh was converted into a high security jail.
Apart from the jail authorities, local police as well as paramilitary
forces were looking after the security of jail. On the intervening
night of 21/22-1-2004, above named three accused escaped from
the jail by digging a 94 feet long tunnel. Initially, a case was
registered in this regard u/s 223, 224, 452, 457 IPC at Police
Station Sector 34 Chandigarh under FIR No.17 on 22-1-2004 on
the basis of report received from Sh. Dalbir Singh Rana, the then
Superintendent, Model jail, Chandigarh, and now an accused.
During course of investigation, Dalbir Singh Rana Superintendent
After receiving a
telephone call, accused Narain Singh Chaura and Baljit Kaur left
that place in three wheeler of Vijay Kumar. Baljit Kaur got down
on the way for arranging transport and met Gurdeep Singh who
provided his car no. PIQ 927 at a place pointed by Jagtar Singh
Hawara through his mobile phone. It is alleged that this car was
used by Jagtar Singh Hawara and other escapees to go towards
Fatehgarh Sahib where they stopped on road side, changed their
clothes and left for some unknown destination. Gurnam Singh
accompanied Baljit Kaur and travelled in said car upto Model Jail,
Chandigarh. Baljit Kaur was arrested on 31-1-2004 and on the
basis of her disclosure statement, a mobile phone set was
recovered from her house. Subscriber application forms, filled in
her hand, regarding purchase of mobile connection, were also
taken in possession. Gurnam Singh was arrested on 5-2-2004 who
murder case which was being received through Hawala etc. and
other organizations. Cielo car was also parked near the jail at the
time of occurrence. Abid Mehmood, a Pakistani spy who was
lodged in Model jail in some other criminal case, used to meet
Jagtar Singh Hawara and discuss the issue of revival of terrorism.
On 21-1-2004 at about 11:00 a.m. accused Jagtar Singh Hawara
and Abid Mehmood had a meeting in dispensary of Model Jail,
Chandigarh where he wished him success in their mission.
Accused Subeg Singh, Nand Singh and Sher Singh, other jail
inmates also disclosed during investigation that they were close
confidants of Jagtar Singh Hawara, Jagtar Singh Tara and Paramjit
Singh Bheora.
Singh and Sher Singh that after their escape, they would revive the
terrorism by killing top leaders and would paralyse the State
machinery. One wooden net seat frame of the chair plastered with
soil, four pieces of clothes made into the ropes, one weight lifting
iron rod, electric extension cord, electric switch board, 38 bundles
of soil filled in different clothes and other connected items were
taken in police possession from barrack no.7. An emergent light
was found lying inside the tunnel. Apart from it, quilts, pillow, 27
blankets, two TV sets, radio set, tape recorder with cassettes, two
wooden tables, plastic buckets, utensils, two kirpans, iron dumble,
carpets, bundle of news papers and magazines were found lying in
said barrack and were taken in possession. A tunnel was detected
in the month of June 2002 which started from Gurudwara barrack.
This fact was brought to the notice of all the senior officers of jail
and D.S.Rana, Dalbir Singh Sandhu, Ved Mittar Gill, Paramjit
Singh Rana and Inder Singh. However, these accused intentionally
and willfully concealed this fact and hushed up the case by filling
up this tunnel themselves. Sh. D.S. Rana, the then Superintendent
of Model Jail, Chandigarh misrepresented the facts to senior
officers of Chandigarh Administration. Despite detection of tunnel
and recovery of mobile phones and huge amount from the accused
from Gurudwara barrack, same staff continued to be on duty at
barrack no.7. Accused also used to raise pro Khalistan slogans and
make sedition inside jail. Accused D.S.Rana, D.S. Sandhu, Ved
Mittar Gill used to help the accused in meeting other inmates of
jail, other relatives and friends in the office of Superintendent.
D.S. Rana and other jail official accused hatched a conspiracy
with escapee accused Jagtar Singh Hawara etc. and helped them in
digging the tunnel. They also took part in a criminal conspiracy to
wage war against the State by illegal acts of commission and
omission concealing the existence of such designs.
All the
that she along with Gurdeep Singh used maruti car no. PIQ-927 to
escape the accused persons from Burail Jail and said car was lying
at residence of Gurdeep Singh at village Alampur, District
Fatehgarh Sahib. She deposed that thereafter this recovery of car
was made from the house of Gurdeep Singh by memo
Ex.PW18/D. She deposed that thereafter on 4-2-2004, accused
Baljit Kaur suffered another disclosure statement Ex. PW18/C
and as per disclosure statement she got recovered black colour
Motorola handset from her village Miyamir, District Fatehgarh
Sahib at her residence and phone was taken in possession by
memo Ex.PW18/D. At the time of examination of this witness,
case property could not be produced despite the Court giving 45
minutes and without production of case property and cross
examination was allowed.
21.Similar to accused Gurnam Singh, with regard to this accused
Gurdeep Singh also, it can be observed that there is no proved
relationship or other evidence of prosecution to show that these
two accused Gurdeep Singh and Baljit Kaur were in constant
touch and use to meet.
22.As with regard to recovery of car no.PIQ-927, PW22 SI Diwan
Singh has deposed that as per disclosure statement Ex. PW18/A,
car driven by accused Gurdeep Singh was recovered at the
instance of Baljit Kaur from the house of accused Gurdeep Singh.
Cross examination of PW18 Inspector Poonam Dilawari being
witness of this recovery, shows that she was unable to give quite
relevant facts with regard to the house from where the recovery
was made as she was unable to tell if the house where the
recovery was made was having boundary wall and entry gate. In a
case like this, there should have been a eidetic memory in the
minds of police officials. She deposed that she can not tell if
Inspector verified from the villagers as to who is owner of the
house. She deposed that when they visited the house, lot of
persons were present who included old persons. PW22 SI Diwan
Singh who claims to have made recovery of this car, seems to
have been also caught in cross examination as he was unable to
disclose many relevant facts about the place of recovery and the
time of recovery. He deposed that local police was not called at
village Alampur and he requested the father of accused Gurdeep
Singh to call some respectables of the village, but he did not call
anyone. It is quite surprising that instead of himself looking for
independent witnesses to join, he asked father of accused Gurdeep
Singh to call respectable persons and explained that father of
Gurdeep Singh did not sign any paper. He deposed that the house
from where recovery was made was having a gate which was open
when they reached it and no other person was present in the house
except Gurdeep Singh. Keys of the car were inside the car. There
was no dust on the car and it was appearing to be used in normal
way. He deposed that he does not know if car was having petrol in
it or not and when it was started. He deposed that he does not
remember if he mentioned of the documents and the keys in the
D.K.Basu
V.
State
1997(1)RCR(Criminal)372,
that
of
West
interrogation
Bengal
was
not
of
is concerned, learned
counsel for accused Narain Singh Chaura has heavily stressed that
it was illegally recorded and has not been proved in accordance
with law. Since the scribe of this document remained unexamined
and with regard to Inspector Diwan Singh it remained unexplained
as to if he was just a witness to it or he had himself recorded the
disclosure statement. Learned counsel for the accused was able to
impress this Court with the fact that none of the witnesses of the
prosecution has specifically deposed that signatures on disclosure
statement are of Narain Singh Chaura and same are voluntary in
nature. In this regard, here itself the statement of Narain Singh
Chaura can be discussed who appeared in defence as DW6 and he
has submitted in his defence certain documents like application he
had made upon his arrest that he was being unnecessarily framed
in the case and was made to sign disclosure statement and he
never made disclosure statement to any police official. Since the
accused had taken risk of appearing in own evidence and deposed
on oath, it happens to be a case of oath against oath with regard to
the fact if the disclosure statement Ex PW11/B was voluntarily in
nature. Thus, it requires independent corroboration which would
have been with the statement of witness Vijay Kumar who has not
appeared for prosecution or the statements of electricity
department, who have resiled.
38.In regard to these recoveries it can be observed that the incident of
escape allegedly occurred in the intervening night of 20/21-12004, however, said recoveries have been shown to be of 31-12004 and 17.2.2004. It remained unexplained as to in between this
period whether the electricity remained disconnected.
39.Statement of PW13 tells another story. He mentioned that on 301-2004, he was posted as ASI at crime branch and was witness to
arrest of Narain Singh and thereafter on 5-2-2004, he alongwith
ASI Surinder Kumar and other police officials, C.S.Gujral, Karam
Singh and other staff of electricity department, CFSL Team and
photographer came near Burail Jail. From this place, the
electricity was put off at the time of jail break. From this spot,
three pieces of wire were taken out by the staff of electricity
department after inspection by CFSL team and photographs and
videography was done. These were sealed with seal of SK at five
places vide memo Ex. PW3/1. The witness introduced new date 52-2004 for this recovery. It does not appear to be mere mistake in
mentioning the date to be 5-2-2004 instead of 17-2-2004.
Ex.PW3/1 is shown to be dated 17-2-2004. Witness PW13 SI
Ranjit Singh seems to be quite unaware of many facts which he
must have known had he been actual witness to the facts. He
deposed nothing as to who had given information to the IO to the
effect that this was the place which was used by Narain Singh,
accused to stop the main supply. While the case of prosecution is
that it was Narain Singh Chaura himself who had identified the
place. He deposed that he does not know the name of worker of
electricity department who had climbed up the electric pole
through wooden ladder brought by them.
PW1 Sukhwinder
have not come in the prosecution evidence from the mouth of any
witness. Ex. PW4/36, Ex.PW4/39 are the two photographs
showing that in a field having green crop on some part dry stocks
in the form of fodder are lying. This was the place which was
outlet to the tunnel and it becomes quite interesting to note that
how a person owning this land escaped noticing dry brown colour
fodder stocks lying amidst green vegetation crop which was quite
distinguishable. Ex. PW4/50 is the photograph of wooden plank
on which green leaves have been pasted in some form to create
camouflage. Ex.PW4/53 is the opening inside the barrack and it
appears that this opening was covered with the camouflage as
shown in Ex.PW4/50. Scene inside the barrack as depicted by the
photographs Ex. Pw4/52, Ex.PW4/54, Ex.PW4/62 and Ex.PW4/63
goes to show that several articles and wood fuel was scattered in
such a way that it camouflage and cover the opening in a very tidy
manner. These photographs Ex.PW4/54, Ex. PW4/61 and
Ex.PW4/64 show that mud parcels were in wooden cloths and
neatly kept in shelfs with no stains of any mud nearby. These
photographs have been simply tendered by this witness.
43.However, any of the Investigating Officers have not deposed as to
what were the circumstances the Investigating Officers wanted to
bring before the Court by way of these photographs to support the
case of prosecution as on the contrary these photographs show that
inside the barrack as the escapees had assistance of a cook and
they had sufficient amount of wood fuel and food to store, they
had stored the same around opening of the tunnel inside the
barrack and camouflage it and likely to deceive anyone and
particularly when the escapees were over sensitive to their articles,
claiming themselves to be different from other prisoners, certainly
the accused jail officials or other police officials deputed for
checking the same must have over looked or stood deceived.
Cross examination of this witness as photographer also reflected
one thing that as he reached the place of occurrence, scene of
crime was changed to lot of extent. He specifically admits that no
curtains were hanging inside the grill doors. This Court fails to
appreciate the reason for change in crime scene circumstances if at
all the photographs were to be taken for proving any fact.
44.SI Tarsem Singh from Police Station Mani Majra Chandigarh has
been examined by the prosecution as PW7 to depose the fact that
in his presence one computer key board, CPU and speaker was
taken into police possession vide memo Ex.PW7/A from Guru
Asra Trust, Village Palsora, UT, Chandigarh. ASI Surinder Kumar
had conducted these seizure proceedings. He appeared as PW19
and has deposed the same and has mentioned that these articles
were handed over to Inspector KIP Singh, Crime Branch. Now
why these seizures were made and how they are relevant with
regard to charges against the accused, has not been narrated by
any of the witness and he also says he doesn't know why they
were seized. How these articles have any bearing to any other
evidence collected, has not been brought before the Court and is
CFSL, one black colour electricity holder which was nailed inside
the tunnel wall having one electricity bulb fixed on it and
connected with electricity wire of two meters was recovered
which was taken into possession. On the same day, one wooden
stick which was installed inside the tunnel on the top entry point
was recovered. The witness produced original articles and PW20
SI Pyare Lal deposed about the fact that these articles were
received by him being Incharge of Police Post Burail. This Court
fails to understand if PW6 Kala Singh was first to enter the tunnel
and he had found only two articles therein, one bulb and one
torch, then how on later occasion some more articles were
recovered from inside the tunnel. This witness PW21 DSP Jagbir
Singh has mentioned of recoveries being effected on 22-1-2004
and 27-1-2004 and 30-1-2004. However, when he was cross
examined with regard to other aspects of investigation, he deposed
that he did not verify the factum of duty of warden who was
posted to said barrack and he mentioned that it was not part of his
investigation. As from the statement of this witness, it can be
picked up that investigation was being conducted in fragments by
number of police officials but for the reason best known to some
senior police officers who must have made the teams, but those
senior officers have not joined the investigation nor appeared in
the Court to depose how they connected the evidence and
concluded about conspiracy. Here itself a mention can be done of
PW22 SI Diwan Singh who has deposed about the prosecution
custody
of
the
escapees
and
observe
suspicious
accused found involved, has not been brought up before the Court.
It was contended that as per the Tafteesh register, no statement of
these witnesses was recorded in between 22nd and 24th. As from
the statement of these witnesses summoned for prosecution from
the jail, a lot of their evidence was discussed at bar to contend that
these witnesses in fact helped the jail official accused in their
defence that they were very vigilant and surveillant and security of
barrack no.7 was not only with the jail officials but with Operation
Cell of Chandigarh Police. It was contended by learned counsel
for the accused jail officials that they would not have risked their
job for any reason unless they were either sympathetic to the
escapees, sharing their ideology or were benefited in any way
including corruption and if it was out of fear they received, they
themselves are victim. It was contended that inspite of keeping the
jail official accused in police custody and interrogating for several
days, nothing was discovered from their possession so as to show
that they shared any mind in the alleged conspiracy. Specially
with regard to accused Paramjit Singh Rana, it was mentioned that
in August 2002 only he had joined and just completed probation
period, so he lacked that experience.
48.Immediately the arguments appeals any prudent mind but the
court has to consider that merely due to bad investigation or only
for the reason that some other person liable to be prosecuted has
not been made accused or made witness instead cannot absolve
the accused facing trial if the evidence establishes the ingredients
have been put to trial for the said offences. Same are reproduced
for convenience.
Chapter V
52.Inspection of Jails by Inspector General - It shall be the
duty of the Inspector General, as far as may be, personally to visit
and inspect every jail atleast once in each year, and to satisfy
himself that the provisions of the Prisons Act, 1894 and all rules,
regulations, directions and orders made or issued thereunder
applicable to such jail, are duly obeyed and enforced, and that the
management of each jail is in all respects efficient and
satisfactory. A note recording the result of each visit and
inspection shall be made in a register (Visitors' Book)
to be maintained by the Superintendent for the purpose
or otherwise communicated.
Duties of the Inspector General at inspections(f)
time to visit and inspect every jail situated within the limits of his
district and to satisfy himself that the provisions of the Prisons
Act 1894 and of all rules, regulations, directions and orders made
or issued thereunder, applicable to such jail, are duly observed
and enforced. (2) In all matters relating to the discipline
maintained in and the management of jails, the District Magistrate
or other Magistrate visiting and inspecting any jail under the
provisions of these rules shall discharge his duties subject to the
general control of the Inspector General. (3) A record of the
result of each visit and inspection made, shall be
entered in a register (Visitor's book) to be maintained
by the Superintendent for the purpose or otherwise
communicated in the form of a note.
General
directions-General
directions
under
sub
(b)
In cases, which are not urgent, the Superintendent will refer, in the
ordinary course, to the Inspector General and will communicate
that officer's reply, without delay to the Magistrate.
Duties of Superintendent generally stated.
(1)
(2)
surveillance of jail.
Chapter VII (62)
Superintendent of Jail
64
to:(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
70
Senior
Assistant
Superintendent;
Assistant
Superintendent,
Welfare
Officer,
Sub Assistant
Superintendent and every person for the time being performing all
or any of the functions or duties of a deputy Superintendent, in
regard to the functions or duties so performed.
95.
Superintendent.
98.
Deputy
Superintendent's
Journal -
The
Deputy
Superintendent
to
search
weekly
for
110. Deputy
(b)
check the muster roll and satisfy himself that every prisoner is
present or accounted for and satisfy himself generally that
everything is in proper order. He shall enter a report of his
inspection in his journal, noting therein the state of the clothing,
cleanliness, numerical strength and other matters of importance
relating to the prisoners.
118. Other matters of importance to be noted in
Deputy
Superintendent's
Journal -
The
Deputy
of
entries
in
the
Deputy
Superintendent
responsible
for
the
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
open
in
the
presence
of
the
Deputy/Assistant
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)
(l)
(m)
(n)
(o)
(p)
(q)
(r)
(s)
Warder
271 It shall be the duty of every warder(a)
not to take off any portion of his uniform or lie or sit down
whilst on duty;
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
517 Unlocking wards and counting prisoners at daybreak- When the bell or gong is sounded at day break, the
convict watchman on duty inside the wards shall wake the
prisoners and superintend the folding of the bedding. The
prisoners each having neatly arranged his bedding on his sleeping
berth shall then sit in double file down the centre of the wards. On
the arrival of the Deputy Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent
and head warders, the wards shall be opened, the prisoners
marched out in pairs, searched, counted and their numbers
checked with the entries in the lock up register.
528 Prisoners not to leave their berths- No prisoner shall
be allowed to go to the bed of any other prisoner without
sufficient cause and without informing the convict watch on duty.
After 9:00 p.m. no prisoner shall leave his sleeping place except
to go to latrine.
535 Matters affecting caste or religion- (1) No undue
(2)
night.
(3)
(4)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(2)
(3)
(4)
criminal
prisoners
not
sentenced
to
rigorous
imprisonment;
Such loss of privileges admissible under the remission system for
the time being in force as may be prescribed by rules made by the
Governor-General in Council;
Stopping from recreational facilities.
Stopping for canteen facilities.
Recovery from wages from material loss, caused willfully.
Transfer to special prison.
Postponement of leave.
Imposition of hand-cuffs of such pattern and weight, in such
articles;
to
regulate
all
interviews
and
while
functioning
as
Warder,
Model
Jail,
has
not
been
led.
(As
relied
by
CENTRAL
on patrolling duty and they visited every barrack after every hour.
He admitted that he and other guards stationed outside barrack
no.7 have told them that everything was OK and accordingly
they noted down this fact in their night report book. He admitted
that it is correct that if any suspicious activity is found inside the
barrack, same has to be informed to Deputy Superintendent and
Superintendent Jail and other high officers in the jail in writing
and he admitted that he had never done so in writing. He was
unable to give any explanation for his conduct also. He admitted
that he had never told to the officials of Chandigarh police
stationed at jail premises regarding the suspicious activities of
barrack no.7. Rather he says that it was not his duty to inform
them. He admits that as per rules whenever their duty started,
prisoners in particular were checked and whenever duty was off
the prisoners were again checked and at the time of handing over
duty to other guards. He admitted that he alongwith other guards
used to play volley ball with inmates of this barrack no.7. PW30
Jagtar Singh in his cross examination admitted that on every
Sunday every barrack was checked by jail staff including
Chandigarh police officials. Similar to PW29, he also admitted
about the patrolling duty and the fact that they did not disclose
suspicious activities to anyone from Chandigarh police which
used to frequently visit this barrack. As with regard to sewerage,
he deposed that Municipal Corporation officials used to come to
jail in routine practice. He admitted that it was his duty also to
check the barracks including barrack no.7 and he did not find
anything inside the barrack or gave any information to any
officer. He particularly admitted that the guards stationed at main
tower used to ask after every five minutes from the guard
stationed at every barrack in loud voice if everything was alright
and he alongwith his co-guards used to reply that everything was
OK. He deposed that he and other guards never tried to enter
barrack no.7 when the barrack was opened during day time. He
then admitted that there was only one switch of electricity and
same was outside the barrack. This suggestion was put up to
establish the fact that electricity form inside the barrack could not
have been switched of by the inmates themselves unless it was
switched of from the outside. This witness deposed that it can be
possible that the escape may have taken place before 12:00 mid
night before he had joined duty on that night. PW31 Constable
Vinod who was posted as Warder has deposed that he was on duty
at barrack no.7 from 3:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. and he did not check
at the time of his duty from 3:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. whether the
inmates were inside the barrack or not. Then he deposed that
inmates were still in barrack when he left his duty and other three
took charge from him. So infact at what hour in night the escapees
left has been not even detected what to say of proving it. He
admitted that he never saw any tunnel in barrack no.7 throughout.
He admitted that no regular curtains were provided by the jail
authorities for barrack no.7 and blankets were put as curtains on
to at what time the doctor will come and witness had informed
that doctor will come late by 30/45 minutes. On this, he was asked
by D.S.Rana to open the office of Medical officer and to allow
Abid Mahmood for meeting.
opened the doctor's room. Accused Inder Singh who was working
as Warder brought the accused Jagtar Singh Hawara and Binda
Lal, Quidi Lambardar brought accused Abid Mahmood. He
deposed that accused Jagtar Singh Hawara and Abid Mahmood
started talking with each other like political and terrorism
activities. He left the doctor's room and accused P.S.Rana
remained present in the room. In cross examination, he deposed
that he stayed for two minutes in the office room of the doctor
after arrival of Jagtar Singh Hawara and Abid Mahmood and he
simply felt that they were discussing about the political and
terrorism, but did not hear specifically which he could narrate.
This witness explains in cross examination that when Dr.
Chauhan reached, he rushed to doctor's room and asked others to
move out as doctor had come. This statement seems to be made to
show to the Court that meeting was in a concealed way. However,
as with regard to the meeting, this witness admits that such
meetings are generally allowed in the jail. He admitted that no
entries were made in any register. He clarifies that his statement
was recorded roughly after a week of the said meeting and also
added that he does not know as to how police came to know of
said meeting having been got done on the instructions of
Home-III,
for
Home
Secretary,
Chandigarh
since
31-10-2002
without
any
valid
reason
and
These letters are symbolic of the fact that escapist were being
heard at many levels in the system and jail staff did not have as
much independence in its functioning as should have been.
Ex.DW1/I is the letter written by the Superintendent, Model Jail,
Chandigarh on 16-7-2001, giving elaborate account to IG Prisons
about the scarcity of human resources and infrastructure. It
specifically mentioned that plight of the staff running the jail
could better be imagined than described. The letter brings forth
the plight of jail staff in terms that human ability is limited in its
results and the jail manual which is designed for ideal conditions
was not workable with the given infrastructure.
Ex.
DW1/J
is
the
letter
dated
4-11-2002
from
the
started abusing him and asked how did he dare to come to their
barrack. Letter mentions about the conduct of these two escapees
and how the Senior Police offices present including learned
District and Sessions Judge, Chandigarh were apprised of it. This
letter elaborately mentions how the segregation and special search
operation was conducted thereafter and when the same was being
conducted how the jail officials were abused and intimidated by
the said escapees. It also mentions that convict convict Subegh
Singh who was undergoing life imprisonment, was hiding himself
in Gurudwara came out himself and was also segregated. Letter
gives elaborate account of the scene created and that broken coca
cola bottles were found which were used to threaten the staff. It
mentions about the prohibited articles which were received
incuding one Datri used for weeding out grass, 8 meters rope
made of cloth. In this letter, it was requested that said escapees /
accused be transferred to Nabha jail. This letter to a great extent
shows that the conditions inside the jail were not ordinary and
exceptional conditions require exceptional will to combat. The
jail staff was demoralised and appeared helpless. Except to report
about their plight they had no other way to redeem themselves of
their duty.
Ex.
staff was not resorting to their own wisdom for day to day
activities and as per the jail manual but were looking for
instructions from senior officers for each and every happening
concerning these escapist prisoners. They had sufficient powers
under jail manual to deal with prison offences but were not using
same as often as it should have been but preferred to take seniors
of administration into confidence. This court had given a
thorough reading to the Jail Manual that provides for the duties of
these jail officials but failed to find provisions where a political
leader or a person just by fact of being Member of Parliament had
a say in the administration of prison, its discipline and rule of law.
That indicates their will was not as independent as should have
been given their responsibilities.
Ex.DW4/12 is the report given by Sh. K.C. Shenmar, Nonofficial visitor, Model Jail, Chandigarh to the Advisor to the
Administrator, UT, Chandigarh in which wholesome account of
the conditions of jail environment have been narrated specially
the conduct of escapees accused. Report specifically mentions
about the shortage of staff and other facilities and that existing
official Visitor Sh. K.C. Shenmar was given due weightage and
those associated with administration of jails as outsiders also had
word of worry and sympathy for the jail staff.
Ex.DW4/46 is the report given by the Superintendent Jail to Sr.
Officers of the jail IG Prisons about the procedure adopted for
interview of the accused involved in late S.Beant Singh, Ex. Chief
Minister Punjab's assassination case. It mentions about the police
officials of CBO cell and Chandigarh police being actively
involved in supervising such interviews. This letter and the
of
this
witness
exhibits
the
documents
showing
that
77. In regard to accused Ved Mitter Gill, there has been specific
allegations that from his house a book Great Escapes was
recovered. Although recovery has been disputed on various
grounds like discussed in regard to other recoveries, but recovery
of book alone can not connect the accused to the conspiracy when
the book is one which is very likely to be found with anyone
associated with the jail.
78. Particularly with regard to accused H.P. Singh, it can be observed
investigating
agency,
prosecutor
and
the
jail
populism. Those who have executive control over the these three
vulnerable pillars should understand that Court administer justice
in accordance with law. There is no place for whimsical, fanciful
and populist decisions under the Rule of Law. Those who are part
of police, prosecution and prisons should be given as equal
independence as to Judiciary if the Rule of Law has to sustain.
The investigating officers of this case, the police officials who
were given duty of search and surveillance at the jail and the jail
officials, have not given the best of their ability. Quite likely
because they too are humans with choice to compromise or
demise from system.
Singh
Hawara
and
Paramjit
Singh
Bheora,
through
Pronounced: 11-8-2015
(Anubhav Sharma)
Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Chandigarh.
All the one hundred and twenty three pages are checked and signed.
(Anubhav Sharma)
Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Chandigarh.