Rajveer Singh vs State Of M.P. & Anr

On 16.5.2018 a statement was made by Mr. Kamal Maurya, Additional Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri on his own that yesterday he was told by

the SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri that he is in possession of order dated 10.4.2017 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 and, therefore,

he would make the said order available. On that day Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri was also present in the Court although he

was not required to do so, therefore a question was put by this Court to him that when he got the order dated 10.4.2017 passed by this Court in

M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 then it was replied by him that the same was in the case diary and the said fact was mentioned in the order sheet as the said

statement was made by Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri in the presence of Shri Vishal Mishra, Additional Advocate General and

Shri Prakhar Dhengula, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

In view of the statement made by Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri, this Court observed that on 7.5.2018 when the diary was

produced by the Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri, Shri Prakhar Dhengula Public Prosecutor had verified the page numbers of the case diary and had

found that pages from Srl. No.212 to 221 were missing and accordingly following observations were made:-

…............. Shri Prakhar Dhengula was also requested to verify that whether the entire case diary was properly numbered or not. After going

through the case diary, it was submitted by Shri Prakhar Dhengula that after page No.211 the next page is numbered as 222 instead of 212. It is

further submitted by Shri Prakhar Dhengula that it is not clear that whether these 10 pages were earlier taken out by the Investigating Officer from

the case diary or the incorrect numbering was done by mistake. However, in order to avoid further manipulation, he has corrected the numbering of

the case diary and page No.222 is renumbered as 212 and so on and the case diary contains total 420 pages. Since the diary is required for

investigation of the matter, therefore, it was directed that the photocopy of the entire case diary may be prepared in the presence of Shri V.D. Sharma

and Shri Prakhar Dhengula and each and every pages should be attested by the Superintendent of Police, District Shivpuri and Shri Pradeep Walter,

SHO, P.S. Karera, District Shivpuri so that the photocopy of the case diary may be kept in a sealed cover in this proceeding and the original case

diary may be returned.

Thus, on 7.5.2018 itself it has come to light that 10 pages from the case diary were missing but it was not known that whether those 10 pages were

taken out of the case diary or it was as a result of mistaken numbering of the pages. On 16.5.2018, considering the submissions made by Mr. B.P.

Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was already in the case diary,

then it was presumed by this Court that it was possible that those 10 missing pages might be the copy of the order of this Court in

M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 and it is possible that those pages might have been deliberately taken out by the police authorities so as to show their ignorance

with regard to passing of the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011.

Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri has filed reply to the effect that on 16.5.2018 in reply to the query raised by this Court it was

replied that after he was appointed as OIC he has downloaded the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011. Thus in nutshell it is a

specific stand that he had never made a statement on 16.5.2018 to the effect that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was

already in the case diary.

Today, Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri is present in person. Again in the presence of Shri Vishal Mishra, Additional Advocate

General and Shri Prakhar Dhengula, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State, a specific question was put to Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera,

District Shivpuri that whether he had made a statement on 16.5.2018 to the effect that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was

in the case diary or not, then sticking to the reply which he has filed, he submitted that he never made such a statement andsubmitted that he had

made the following statements:-

^^;g vkns'k eq>s ugh feyk vkSj ;fn dsl Mk;jh esa gks rks eq>s tkudkjh ugh gS^^

Thus it is clear that the SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri has taken a U turn and has tried to raise a finger towards the Court alleging that the Court

had recorded a wrong order sheet and his statement in the Court was misconstrued.

The unfortunate aspect of this matter is that right from very beginning, this Court is observing that this case depicts a very sorry state of affairs and

unbridled attitude of the police department towards the judiciary including the highest Court of the country i.e. Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. At

every stage they had tried to flout the order of the Supreme Court of India as well as the orders of the High Court Madhya Pradesh and now a new

attempt is being made by the police department to raise a finger towards the Court directly or indirectly that the statement made by Mr. B.P. Tiwari,

SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri on 16.5.2018 before this Court was misconstrued and the order dated 16.5.2018 in which it is mentioned that Mr.

B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri had stated that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was already in the case

diary, was wrongly recorded. Again the conduct of the police authorities reflects their hostile attitude towards the judiciary and depicts a very sorry

state of affairs. This Court by order dated 7.5.2018 has observed as under:-

As per the office note, the copy of this order was sent to the SHO, Police Station Karera by registered letter dated 17.04.2017 which was dispatched

on 25.04.2017 and the dispatch numbers are 13784 and 13786. It has already been observed by this Court in its order dated 16.4.2018 that once

adequately stamped and properly addressed letter is sent by registered post, then the presumption can be drawn that the same has been received by

the addressee. Although the presumption was drawn under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act but the State has not tried to rebut the same in its

reply dated 6.2.2017. Although the order passed by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 8358/2011 is not in the case diary but it is clear that the said order was

already received by SHO, Police Station, Karera District Shivpuri, and most probably, with an intention to give undue advantage to the accused

persons, the same was not kept deliberately in the case diary.

Prior to this, by order dated 16.4.2018, this Court had drawn a presumption under Section 27 of General Clauses Act as the order dated 10.4.2017

passed by this Court in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was sent by the Registry of this Court by registered letter dated 17.4.2017 to the SHO, Police Station,

Karera, District Shivpuri and accordingly a presumption under Section 27 of General Clauses Act was drawn and it was observed that it can be

presumed that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was received by the SHO, Police Station Karera, District Shivpuri.

Thereafter inspite of the opportunity given by this Court, the State did not try to rebut the presumption as raised by this Court under Section 27 of

General Clauses Act, therefore, this Court by order dated 7.5.2018 observed that in fact the order of this Court dated 10.4.2017 in

M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 has been received by the SHO, Police Station, Karera, District Shivpuri. Again it was observed that the stand of the police

department right from the very beginning is that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was never received by the SHO, Police

Station Karera, District Shivpuri but they did not try to rebut the presumption drawn by this Court under Section 27 of General Clauses Act with

regard to the receipt of the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011.

In view of the reply filed by Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri by which he had confronted the order passed by this Court on

16.5.2018 by mentioning that he had never made a statement to the effect that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was in the

case diary, therefore, the Registry of this Court had sought information from the Postal Department as to whether the order dated 10.4.2017 passed

by this Court in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was actually delivered to SHO, Police Station Karera, District Shivpuri or not. A reply has been received from

the Postal Department Karera, District Shivpuri along with the acknowledgment of receipt of order dated 10.4.2017 passed by this Court in

M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011, according to which the registered letter sent by the Registry containing the copy of order dated 10.4.2017 passed in

M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was actually received in the Police Station Karera, District Shivpuri and was received by one Head Constable and the copy of

the acknowledgment of the same has also been sent. Accordingly, the Registry of this Court has prepared the following note:-

^^ Dispatch Section

fnukad 21-6-18 MCrC 8358/11

ekuuh; fizafliy jftLV~zkj egksn; ds vkns'k ds

ikyu esa bl jftLV~zh ds i= dzekad 1078 fnukad 20-06-2018 ds }kjk iksLV ekLVj djSjk f'koiqjh ls okafNr fjiksVZ cqykbZ xbZ Fkh mlds rkjrE; esa

iksLV vkWfQl djSjk ls fnukad 28-04-2017 dh jftLVMZ Mkd dh fMysojh fLyi dh lR;kfir izfrfyfi bZ&esy }kjk izkIr gqbZ gS ftlds ljy dzekad 04 ij vafdr

izfof""V ls ;g Li""V gS fd ,e0lh0vkj0lh 8358@2011 ds vafre vkns'k 10-04-2017 dh izfrfyfi tks fd jftLVMZ Mkd dh jlhn dzekad ARI480497392N fnukad

25-04-2017 }kjk Fkkuk izHkkjh djSjk ftyk f'koiqjh dks izsf""kr dh x;h Fkh mDr Mkd iksLV vkWfQl djSjk }kjk Fkkuk izHkkjh djSjk ftyk f'koiqjh dks

fnukad 28-04-2017 dks iznk; dh x;h ftls Fkkus ds iz0vk0 }kjk gLrk{kj dj izkIr fd;k x;kA

rnkuqlkj okafNr fjiksVZ eku~uh; U;k;ky; ds le{k voyksdukFkZ izLrqr gSA

&&gLrk0&&

21-6-18

tkod 'kk[kk^^

The copy of the acknowledgment slip received from the Postal Department is as under:-

Thus, it is clear that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was actually received by SHO, Police Station Karera,

District Shivpuri on 28.4.2017 and deliberately they kept this order out of the case diary so as to avoid the observations of this Court that the case

requires investigation. It appears that in fact it was initially kept in the case diary and when the case diary was called by this Court in this proceeding

then in order to show their ignorance about the order passed by this Court on 10.4.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 the copy of the order was

deliberately taken out from the case diary and that is why Shri Prakhar Dhengula, Public Prosecutor while verifying the case diary on 7.5.2018 found

that 10 pages from Srl. No.212 to 221 were missing and on the said day itself it was apprehended by this Court that the police authorities must have

taken out these 10 important pages from the case diary. Thereafter, the police department and different police personnel by filing reply to the show

cause notices issued by this Court has come up with the specific stand that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011

was never received in the Police Station Karera, District Shivpuri. Thus not only by manipulating the case diary they constantly lied before the Court

by making a false statement.

On 16.5.2018 as Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri was unaware that he might be required to answer any of the questions which

might put by the Court because he was not summoned by the Court and he had come to the Court only in order to escort the Additional

Superintendent of Police, Shri Kamal Maurya, therefore, it appears that he replied truly before the Court that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in

M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was in the case diary and that is why it was so recorded in the presence of Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District

Shivpuri. Order dated 16.5.2018 was dictated in presence of Shri Kamal Maurya, Additional Superintendent of Police, District Shivpuri, Shri Vishal

Mishra, Additional Advocate General and Shri Prakhar Dhengula, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State. At the time when the order was being

dictated no body controverted that the statement which was being recorded in the order was not made by Mr.B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District

Shivpuri. Even Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri did not dispute at that time that, the fact that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in

M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was in the case diary and accordingly that order in detail was passed in presence of all the lawyers and the authorities. It

appears that when the Court drew an inference that once the order was received in the Police Station Karera, District Shivpuri and it might be those

10 pages which were not found in the case diary at the time when Superintendent of Police had appeared before the Court, therefore, in order to save

their skin from the further allegation of producing the manipulated and tampered case diary, a false reply has been filed by Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P),

Karera, District Shivpuri that he had never made a statement before the Court that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was in

the case diary.

This order is being dictated in presence of Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri, Shri Vishal Mishra, Additional Advocate General and

Shri Prakhar Dhengula, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State.

A compliance report has been filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh and in which it is mentioned that the applicant Rajvir Singh and the co-accused

Raghvendra Shukla who are the employees of the police department are absconding and inspite of serious efforts they could not be apprehended so

far and a reward of Rs.5000/- has also been declared. Some of the Rojnamcha Sanhas have also been filed along with the compliance report to show

the efforts which are being made by the police authorities to apprehend the applicant and the co-accused Raghvendra Shukla. Again it shows that the

hostile and discourteous attitude of the police department towards this Court.

Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri is present in person and he must have come along with some more police personnel. Today

I.A.No.4944/2018 has been filed by the applicant seeking recall of order dated 18.6.2018 passed by this Court in this case. On 18.6.2018

I.A.No.4736/2018 was filed by the applicant seeking withdrawal of this application and in support of his submissions the counsel for the applicant has

relied upon the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Shaik Hussain & Sons vs. M.G. Kannaiah and another reported in (1981) 3 SCC

71.

Considering the proposition of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Shaik Hussain (supra) as well as various interim orders passed by

this Court, this Court was of the view that the application for withdrawal of the application cannot be allowed and accordingly it was rejected.

Today I.A.No.4944/2018 has been filed for recall of the said order dated 18.6.2018. Again Shri U.K. Bohare tried to pass on the photocopy of the

judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Shaik Hussain (supra) under an impression that this Court might have passed the order dated

18.6.2018 without going through the said judgment. It is unfortunate that Shri U.K. Bohare had developed such an impression in his mind although

there is a specific reference to the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Shaik Hussain (supra) in order dated 18.6.2018.

Be that whatever it may.

The sorry state of affairs is that I.A.No.4944/2018 has been prepared today itself as it contains the affidavit of Rajvir Singh which has been sworn at

Gwalior before Smt. Manjula Tripathi, Oath Commissioner sitting in High Court Madhya Pradesh, Bench Gwalior. It is evident from the seal appended

by the Oath Commissioner, that Rajvir Singh had come in the High Court premises and Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri is also

present in the High Court premises but still the police authorities have come forward with a case that Rajvir Singh is not traceable. Although the stand

taken by the police authorities that Rajvir Singh and Raghvendra Shukla are not traceable clearly indicates their inefficiency towards the discharge of

their duties but the conduct of Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri in raising a finger towards this Court by making a false statement in

his reply as well as by making a false statement before this Court today that he had never made a statement that the order dated 10.4.2017 passed in

M.Cr.C.No.8358/2011 was in the case diary clearly show contemptuous attitude. Rajvir Singh who is wanted, according to the police itself, and the

police is after him, in order to arrest him, is roaming around in this Court premises. He has also sworn an affidavit in the Court premises itself and

must have been sworn after 10:30 am because the Oath Commissioner generally comes to the Court only after 10:30 am. I.A.No.4944/2018 has been

filed today itself after taking permission from this Court that means this application was prepared sometime around 10:30 AM and Rajvir Singh was

roaming around in the Court premises. Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri along with the police force is also present in the Court

premises but still they had come with the case that whereabouts of Rajvir Singh and Raghvendra Shukla are not known. Thus, it is clear that the

compliance report which has been filed by the State is nothing but an attempt to be make false statement before this Court by preparing the false

Rojnamcha Sanhas on papers and when the accused is in front of the eyes of the police authorities but still they had kept their eyes closed so that he

can run away from the judicial dispensation system. At this stage, Shri Vishal Mishra, Additional Advocate General and Shri Prakhar Dhengula, Public

Prosecutor for the respondent/State pray for sometime to address this Court as to what action should be taken in the matter as it is not a case of

simple non-compliance of the order of the Supreme Court as well as that of the High Court but constantly inspite of knowing that this Court has taken

the matter seriously, SDO(P) has courage to raise finger towards the Court by showing that he had never made any statement which was recorded in

order dated 16.5.2018 and they have also filed a false reply to the effect that inspite of sincere efforts, they are unable to apprehend their own police

personnel and a reward of Rs.5,000/- has been declared, specifically when at least one of the so called accused is roaming around the Court premises

and Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri along with police force is also present in the Court premises but still they had kept their eyes

close towards the accused persons and are making continuous false statement before this Court that neither the statement was made by Mr. B.P.

Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri before this Court on 16.5.2018 and the same has been wrongly recorded and has also filed a false report

that the applicant and the co-accused Raghvendra Shukla inspite of every sincere efforts could not be traced.

As prayed, list this case at 2:30 PM as Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri had resiled from his statement before this Court by making

a written reply and today he has stated that he had never made statement on 16.5.2018 in the form in which it has been recorded by this Court, and,

therefore, Shri Vishal Mishra, Additional Advocate General and Shri Prakhar Dhengula, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State were requested to

sign on the corner of the order sheet and accordingly Mr. B.P. Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri was also directed to sign on the corner of

the order sheet so that he may not dispute the proceedings which have been recorded by this Court today itself. Accordingly, the order sheets are

signed by Shri Vishal Mishra, Additional Advocate General and Shri Prakhar Dhengula, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State and Mr. B.P.

Tiwari, SDO(P), Karera, District Shivpuri.