WWW.LIVELAW.

IN
1 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Receivedon:05.03.2014
Registeredon:05.03.2014
Decidedon:07.03.2017
Duration:03Years02Days

ExhibitNo.

INTHECOURTOFSESSIONSJUDGEATGADCHIROLIDISTRICT
GADCHIROLI.
(Presidedoverby:SuryakantS.Shinde)

SESSIONSCASENO.13OF2014&
SESSIONSCASENO.130OF2015

StateofMaharashtra,
ThroughPoliceStationOfficer,
PoliceStation,Aheri
District:Gadchiroli. Prosecution

Versus

1.MaheshKarimanTirki,
Ageabout22years,Occu.Agriculturist,

2.PanduPoraNarote,
Ageabout27years,Occ.Agriculturist,

Bothr/oMurewada,TaluqaEtapalli,
DistrictGadchiroli.

3.HemKeshavdattaMishra,
Ageabout32years,Occu.Education,
R/oKunjbargal,Post:Nagarkhan,
DistrictAlmoda(Uttarkhand)

4.PrashantRahiNarayanSanglikar,
Ageabout54years,Occu.Journalist,
R/o87,ChandrashekharNagar,Krushikesh,
Deharadun,Uttarkhand.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
2 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

5.VijayNanTirki,
Ageabout:30years,Occu.Labour,R/o.Beloda,PostP.V.92,
DharampurTaluqaPakhanjoor,DistrictKanker(C.G.)

6.GokalkondaNagaSaibaba,
Ageabout47years,Occ.Service,
R/oWardenHouse,GwairHoll,Delhi
UniversityRoad,NewDelhi.Accused

Offencepunishableu/s13,18,20,38and39ofTheUnlawful
Activities(Prevention)Act,1967r/wsec.120BoftheIndian
PenalCode.

Shri.Sathianathan,SpecialPublicProsecutorforState.
Shri.S.P.Gadling,AdvocateforaccusedNo.1to4&6.
Shri.P.C.Samaddar,AdvocateforaccusedNo.5.

JUDGMENT
(Deliveredonthis7thdayofMarch,2017)

1] Accused No.1 Mahesh Kariman Tirki, No.2 Pandu Pora

Narote,No.3HemKeshavdattaMishra,No.4PrashantRahiNarayan
Sanglikar,No.5VijayNanTirkiandNo.6GokalkondaNagaSaibaba
alongwithabscondingaccusedhavebeenprosecutedfortheoffence
punishable under sections 13, 18, 20, 38, 39 of The Unlawful
Activities(Prevention)Act,1967(hereinafterreferredasUAPA)read
withSection120BoftheIndianPenalCode.

2] TheallegationsagainstaccusedNos.1to6arethatonor
before 12.9.2013 within India they hatched criminal conspiracy to
wagewaragainsttheGovernmentofIndiaandtocollectpeoplewith
the intention of waging war against the Government of India, to
overawebymeansofcriminalforcetheGovernmentofMaharashtra
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
3 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

andtheGovernmentofIndia,toshakeandreducethefaithofthe
commoncitizeninitsdemocraticGovernmentbylargescaleviolence
destructionoflivesandpropertyandtherebydestabilizethesystemof
Government established by law and to organize the spread of
secessionist and rebellious thoughts by holding convert and secret
meetings,tocollectmoneyinIndiaforachievingtheobjectsofthe
said criminal conspiracy by illegal means, to continue unlawful
activitiesofCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)[hereinafterreferred
as CPI (Maoist)] and its frontal organization Revolutionary
DemocraticFront,forachievingtheobjectsofcriminalconspiracy,to
continuetheactivitiesofTerroristGang,bannedterroristorganization
orunlawfulassociation,singlyorjointlyasamemberoftheTerrorist
Gang&bannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)&itsfrontalorganisation
Revolutionary Democratic Front (hereinafter referred as RDF) to
conspire,advocate,incite,abet&knowinglyfacilitatethecommission
ofaterroristactandunlawfulactivitiesbyuseofviolenceorother
unlawfulmeans,totakepartorcommitoradvocate,abetorincitethe
commission of unlawful activities,being the membersof a banned
TerroristGang.

3] As such accused No.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu

Narote in pursuance of the criminal conspiracy with accused no.3
Hem Mishra and no.6 Saibaba were found in possession of naxal
literature,pamphlets,letters,correspondence,audiovideo,electronic
materials which were to be used for inciting the people to create
violence to cause public disorder and they were receiving the
membersofbannedterroristorganizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontal
organizationRDFandweretakingthemsafelyandsecretlytoforest
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
4 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

areawithintheGadchirolidistricttomeetabscondingunderground
naxals.Accusedno.3HemMishrawasfoundinpossessionof16GB
memorycardofSandiskcompanycontainingletters,correspondence
which were addressed to the Comrades of banned terrorist
organizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF.

4] The accused No.6 Saibaba was found in possession of

harddisks, laptops, pendrives, CDs,DVDs,booklets,memorycards
containingMaoistliteratureandletters,correspondence,pamphlets,
emails, minutes of meetings, report of meetings, audiovideo clips
conductingandaddressingthemeetingsofbannedorganisationCPI
(Maoist)underUAPAanditsfrontalorganisationRDFandfurtherthe
accused no.4 Prashant Rahi & no.5 Vijay Tirki in pursuance of
criminal conspiracy with accused No.1 Mahesh Tirki, no.2 Pandu
Narote,no.3HemMishra&no.6Saibabawerefoundinpossessionof
letters and writings regarding banned terrorist organization CPI
(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDFandtheaccusedNo.1to6
beingthemembersofbannedterroristorganizationCPI(Maoist)and
its frontal organization RDF hatched criminal conspiracy and the
objectofthesaidconspiracywastocreateviolence,tocausepublic
disorderandtospreaddisaffectiontowardstheCentralGovernment
and the State Government and in pursuance of the said criminal
conspiracy accused nos.1 to 6 were foundin possession ofprinted
naxal literature, circulating information which is promotional
literatureofterroristorganizationintheformofbooklets,pamphlets,
correspondence, writings, reports of the meetings, letters, emails,
speeches in audio, video and text formats contained in electronic
gadgets like CDs, DVDs, pendrives, harddisks, memorycards and
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
5 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

foundusingthesameforcirculationamongstthemembersofbanned
organisationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDFandother
personsforcreatingviolenceandcausingpublicdisorder.

5] Thefactsoftheprosecutioncaseareasunder:
The informant Atul Shantaram Awhad (P.W.6), the
Assistant Police Inspector attached to Special Branch, Gadchiroli
lodgedtheF.I.R.(Exh.220)atpolicestation,Aheriallegingthat in
the month of August, 2013 he was attached to Special Branch,
Gadchiroli as Assistant Police Inspector andhe hadreceived secret
informationthataccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandaccusedno.2Pandu
NarotewereworkingforprohibitedbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)
anditsfrontalorganisationRDFandtheywereactivemembersofthe
said organisation. He had also information that the above two
personsi.e.accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotewere
providing materials to the underground naxalites and they were
givingprotectiontothemandtakingthemfromoneplacetoanother
place safely and exchanging information regarding the Maoist
organisation,therefore,onthebasisofthisinformation,heandhis
officerswerekeepingwatchonaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2
PanduNaroteintheareaofEtapalli,AheriandMurewada.

6] The informant P.W.6 API Atul Awhad on 22.8.2013 at

about 6.00 p.m. alongwith his staff had been to Aheri Bus Stand
where accused No.1 Mahesh and accused No.2 Pandu were found
standingatasecludedplaceneartheBusStandofAheriandatabout
6.15p.m.onepersonhavingwhitecaponhisheadcamethereand
they started talking with each other suspiciously. Therefore, the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
6 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

informant(PW6)APIAtulAwhadalongwithhisstaffwenttowards
thosethreepersonsandmadeenquirywiththem,howevertheygave
evasiveanswers. Hence,hecalledtwopanchasandinpresenceof
panchasheaskedtheirnames.OnepersontoldhisnameasMahesh
KarimanTirki(accusedno.1),secondtoldhisnameasPanduPora
Narote (accused no.2) and third person told his name as Hem
KeshavdattaMishra(accusedno.3).InformantP.W.6APIAtulAwhad
broughtaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteandno.3Hem
Mishra to Aheri Police Station where in the presence of panch
witnesses,theirpersonalsearchwastaken.

7] The personal search of accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki was

taken and from his possession three pamphlets regarding banned
organisation CPI (Maoist) and its frontal organisation RDF, one
pocketpursecontainingRs.60/,platformticketdated28.5.2013of
BallarshahRailwayStation,IdentityCardandonemobilephoneof
MicromaxCompanywereseized.Thereafter,thepersonalsearchof
accusedno.2PanduNarotewasalsotakenandfromhispossession
Mobile phone of Samsung Company, one pocket purse containing
cash of Rs.1480/, Platform ticket dated 28.5.2013 of Ballarshah
Railway Station, Pan Card, Identity Card etc. were seized and
thereafterpersonalsearchofaccusedno.3HemMishrawasalsotaken
and from his possession one memory card of 16 GB of Sandisk
companywrappedina paper,onepocketpursecontainingcashof
Rs.7,700/,travellingticketofDelhitoBallarshahdated19.8.2013,
Camera alongwith charger, Pan Card, Identity Card and cloth bag
were seized. All these articles foundin possession ofaccusedno.1
MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishrawereseized
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
7 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

underthepanchanamadrawninpresenceofpanchasvideExh.137.
TheinformantP.W.no.6APIAtulAvhadlodgedreportagainstaccused
No.1 Mahesh Tirki, no.2 Pandu Narote and no.3 Hem Mishra at
Exh.219.Onthebasisofthisreport(Exh.219),theoffenceatCrime
No.3017/2013videF.I.R.(Exh.220)undersection13,18,20,38,39
oftheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)ActreadwithSection120Bof
theI.P.C.wasregisteredatAheriPoliceStationagainstaccusedNo.1
Mahesh Tirki, no.2 Pandu Narote and no.3 Hem Mishra. As the
offencewasregisteredunderUAPA,furtherinvestigationwashanded
overtotheInvestigatingOfficerSubDivisionalPoliceOfficerP.W.11
SuhasBawche.

8] Duringinterrogationwithaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2
Pandu,itwasrevealedthatnaxalladyDVCNarmadakkaof banned
organisationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDF hadtold
themthataccusedno.3HemMishrawascomingfromDelhialong
withimportantthingsandheshouldbebroughttoMurewadaforest
safelyandforthatpurposetheyweresenttoAheriBusStand.During
interrogationwithaccusedno.3HemMishra,itwasrevealedthatone
personinDelhii.e.accusedno.6Saibabawhowasactivememberof
banned organisation CPI (Maoist) and its frontal organisation RDF
hadgivenhimonememorycardwrappedinapaperandtoldthathe
shouldtakeittoDVCNarmadakkawhowasactiveinGadchiroliarea
andtherefore,hewassent.

9] Duringinterrogationwithaccusedno.3HemMishra,the
involvementofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiwasrevealedandasthe
Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche had information that
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
8 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accusedno.4PrashantRahiwascomingtoRaipurorDevriandhence
hepassedsaidinformationtoPoliceStation,Chichgadandonsuch
information on 1.9.2013 P.W.14 Police Inspector Rajendrakumar
Tiwari found accused no.4 Prashant Rahi and no.5 Vijay Tirki at
Chichgad Tpoint,Devriinsuspiciousconditionandthereafterthey
were brought to Aheri Police Station on 2.9.2013 at 5.00 a.m.
Thereafter, Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche arrested
accusedNo.4PrashantRahividearrestpanchanamaExh.239on29
2013andfromhispersonalsearchseizedonemoneypurse,cashof
Rs.8,800/,onevisitingcard,onedrivinglicense,oneYatriCard,one
Newspaper by name 'Dainik Bhaskar' and eight papers relating to
Naxalliteraturealongwithtypewrittenpapersofundertrialprisoner
maoist leader Narayan Sanyal under panchanama Exh.179.
Investigating Officer also arrested accused No.5 Vijay Tirki on
02.09.2013 under arrest panchanamas at Exh.240 and from his
personalsearch,policeseizedonemobilephoneofsilvercolour,cash
of Rs.5,000/, four pieces of paperon whichphone numberswere
writtenandoneNewspaperof'DainikBhaskar'underpanchanamaat
Exh.180.

10] During investigation, it was further revealed that the

accused No.5 Vijay Tirki in pursuance of conspiracy with the
undergroundmemberbynameRamdarofbannedorganisationCPI
(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDFreceivedtheaccusedNo.4
Prashant Rahi who was also a member of banned terrorist
organizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDFandasper
thedirectionsofRamdarhewasattemptingtotaketheaccusedNo.4
PrashantRahitoAbuzmadforestareaformeetingtheseniormaoist
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
9 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

cadreswhowerehidingthemselvesinAbuzmadforestareaandthe
accused No.3 Hem Mishra, no.4 Prashant Rahi and no.6 Saibaba
enteredintothecriminalconspiracywitheachotherandinpursuance
ofthesaidconspiracy,theaccusedNo.6Saibabaarrangedmeetingsof
accused No.3 Hem Mishra and no.4 Prashant Rahi with the
undergroundmembersofbannedterroristorganizationCPI(Maoist)
and its frontal organisation RDF, who were hiding themselves in
Abuzmad forest area and in furtherance of the said criminal
conspiracytheaccusedNo.6SaibabahandedoveramicrochipSD
MemoryCardof16GBofSandiskcompanycontainingvitalmaoist
communicationsandothermaoistdocumentstoaccusedno.3Hem
Mishraandaccusedno.4PrashantRahiwithintentiontofurtherthe
activities of terrorist organization CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organisationRDF.

11] During investigation, the accused no.3 Hem Mishra

expressed his desire to open his facebook account in presence of
witnesshenceInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawchecalledpanch
witnessP.W.4ShrikantGaddewarinPoliceStationAherion26.8.2013
andinthepresenceofpanchwitnessP.W.4ShrikantGaddewarand
InvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawche,accusedno.3HemMishra
openedhisfacebookaccountbyenteringhisusernameandpassword
onthelaptopofAheriPoliceStationandthescreenshotsandtheir
printoutsatArts.A1toA16weretakenbyInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11
Suhas Bawche in presence of P.W.4 Shrikant Gaddewar and
panchanama to that effect was prepared at Exh.200 and the
Videography of the proceeding was done and panchanama to that
effectwaspreparedatExh.199.Thememorycard(16GB)ofSandisk
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
10 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

companyseizedfromthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.3HemMishra
was sent to CFSL, Mumbai and Scientific Expert Bhavesh Nikam
(P.W.21)examinedthesameandreportofCFSLisfiledonrecord.It
is at Exh.266. The certified hardcopies of mirror images of data
contained in said 16 GB memory card of Sandisk company are
annexedtoCFSLreportExh.266andtheyareatArt.A17toA21.
ThesanctionforprosecutionforoffencepunishableunderUAPAwas
obtainedagainstaccusednos.1to5videsanctionorderatExh.17.
Oncompletionofinvestigation,ChargeSheetcametobefiledagainst
accused No.1 to 5 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class,
Aheri.

12] As the offence under section 13, 18, 20, 38, 39 of the
UAPA is exclusively triable by Court of Sessions, learned J.M.F.C.,
Aheri committed the case to Sessions Court after complying the
provisionsofSection207ofCodeofCriminalProcedurebypassing
orderbelowExh.1on26.02.2014.Oncommittal,caseisregisteredas
SessionsCaseNo.13/2014.

13] Duringinterrogationwithaccusedno.3HemMishraand
no.4PrashantRahiinvolvementofaccusedno.6Saibabawasrevealed
andhenceP.W.11SuhasBawchesoughtpermissionfromJMFCAheri
P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas on 492013 for taking the house search of
accusedno.6Saibabaandaftergettingpermissionon792013,he
alongwithAddl.S.P.Mina,PIBadgujar,P.C.Kumbhare,H.C.Dubey
andotherpolicestaffleftforDelhion992013andhadtakenentry
Exh.275Jinthestationdiaryaboutthesameandthereafteron129
2013 he issued letter Exh.252 to incharge Police Station officer,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
11 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Morisnagar for providing police staff, computer expert and

VideographerandthereafterthesaidPoliceStationprovidedpolice
staff to them for conducting raid at the house of accused no.6
SaibabaashewasresidinginthecampusofDelhiUniversity.

14] Thereafter, Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche

alongwith his police staff, videographer, panch and police staff of
DelhiproceededtothehouseofSaibaba andafterreachingtothe
house of accused no.6 Saibaba they found his wife Vasanta was
presentinthehouseandsheopenedthedoorofhouseandtheygave
theirintroductionandthepurposeoftheirvisitattheirhouseand
thereafter,shecalledaccusedno.6Saibaba.Thereafterhousesearch
ofaccusedno.6Saibabawastakenandfromhousesearchelectronic
gadgets Arts.1 to 41 i.e. CDs, DVDs, Pendrives, harddiscs, three
mobiles, two SIM cards, books, magazine and some other articles
wereseizedunderpanchnama(Exh.165)inpresenceofpanchas.

15] After thorough study of seized devices and documents,

Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche had been to Delhi for
arrestingaccusedno.6Saibababutmembersofbannedorganization
madeprotesthenceInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawche could
notarrestaccusedno.6Saibaba. ThereafterSuhasBawche(P.W.11)
obtained the permission and arrest warrant from JMFC, Aheri on
26.2.2014toapprehendaccusedno.6Saibabaandthenaccusedno.6
cametobearrestedvidearrestpanchanamaatExh.269andfromhis
personalsearchonemobile,RCbookofvehicleandcashamountof
Rs.320/wasrecoveredunderpanchanamaatExh.270inpresenceof
panchas.Duringinvestigationelectronicgadgetsi.e.CDs,DVDs,pen
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
12 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

drives,harddisks,laptop,memorycardseizedfromthehousesearch
of accused no.6 Saibaba were sent to CFSL, Mumbai and Bhavesh
Nikam (P.W.21) examined the same and report CFSL is filed on
record. ItisatExh.267. Thehardcopiesofmirrorimagesofdata
contained in said electronic gadgets are annexed to CFSL report
Exh.267(Pagenos.1to247).

16] Thereafter, accused no.6 Saibaba was produced before

J.M.F.C.,AheriandhewasremandedtoM.C.R. TheJ.M.F.C.,Aheri
directedthejailauthoritytoproducetheaccusedNo.6Saibababefore
thisCourtandasperthesaiddirectionstheJailauthorityproduced
accusedno.6SaibababeforethisCourt,hence,thenameofaccused
No.6SaibabawasincludedinthiscasealongwithaccusedNo.1to5.
ThesanctionforprosecutionforoffencepunishableunderUAPAwas
obtained against accused no.6 Saibaba vide sanction order at
Exh.349. Thereafter, supplementary charge sheet came tobe filed
against the accusedNo.6 Saibaba intheCourtofSessionsJudge,
Gadchirolion14.12.2015anditwasregisteredasSessionsCaseNo.
130/2015.

17] The Sessions Case No.130/2015 and Sessions Case No.

13/2014arearisingoutofthesaidincidentandhencemylearned
predecessor Shri D.R.Shirasao passed order below Exh.1 on
14.12.2015 in Sessions Case No.130/2015 for trying both the
SessionsCaseNo.130/2015andSessionsCaseNo.13/2014together.

18] MypredecessorShri.D.R.Shirasaoframedchargeagainst
accused Nos.1 to 6 at Exh.66 on 21.10.2015. The contents of the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
13 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

chargewerereadoverandexplainedtotheaccusedinvernacularto
which,accusedpleadednotguiltyandclaimedfortrial.Duringtrial,
onbehalfofprosecutionfollowingwitnessesareexamined.

P.W.No. NameoftheWitness Exh.No.

1 SantoshNanajiBawne,thepanchwitnessof 136
seizurepanchanamaandseizure ofarticles
fromthepossessionoftheaccusedNos.1to3
(Exh.137)
2 Jagat Bhole, the panch witness on seizure 164
panchanama(Exh.165)ofelectronicgadgets
andotherarticlesfromthehousesearchof
accusedno.6Saibaba.
3 Umaji Kisan Chandankhede, the panch 178
witness on the point of personal search of
accusedNo.4(Exh.179)andpersonalsearch
ofaccusedNo.5(Exh.180)
4 Shrikant Pochreddy Gaddewar, the panch 198
witness on facebook activities of accused
no.3
5 Ravindra Manohar Kumbhare, the police 210
constable, who carried and deposited the
muddemaltoCFSLMumbai
6 AtulShantaramAvhad,thePoliceOfficerand 218
informant.
7 Apeksha Kishor Ramteke, Woman police 222
constable,whobroughtmuddemalproperty
fromCFSLBombaytoAheriPoliceStation.
8 RameshKolujiYede,PoliceHeadConstable, 223
whobroughttheaccusedNo.4&5toPolice
Station,Aheri.
9 RajuPoriyaAtram,thewitnessonthepoint 225
ofincident.
10 PoliceInspectorAnilDigambarBadgujar. 226
11 S.D.P.O. Suhas Prakash Bawche, the 235
InvestigatingOfficer.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
14 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

12 Nileshwar Gaurishankar Vyas, the J.M.F.C. 277

who recorded confessional statements of
accusedno.1Maheshandno.2Pandu.
13 Ganesh Keshav Rathod, Moharar who 297
depositedthemuddemalinMalkhana
14 Police Inspector Rajendrakumar Parmanand 307
Tiwari.
15 Narendra Shitalprasad Dube, Station Diary 308
DutyAmaldar.
16 RaviKhemrajPardeshi,Nodalofficer. 329
17 KhumajiDevajiKorde,CourtSuperintendent. 339
18 KalyaneshwarPrasadBakshi,Addl.Secretary. 345
19 Dr. Amitabh Rajan S.N.Kishore, Home 355
Secretary.
20 RajneeshkumarRatiram,NodalOfficer,BSNL 359
21 Bhavesh Neharu Nikam, Scientific Expert, 371
CFSLMumbai.
22 Manoj Manikrao Patil, Circle Nodal officer, 411
IndianAirtel,Dadar,Mumbai.
23 SDPORameshMalhariDhumal 414

19] Besides this, prosecution has relied on following

documents:

Documents Exh.No.
1] Sanction order issued by Dr.AmitabhRajan, 17
AdditionalChiefSecretarytotheGovernment
of Maharashtra Home Department against
accusedno.1to5.
2] Seizure panchanama in respect of property 137
seized from the possession of accused nos.1
Mahesh Tirki, no.2 Pandu Narote and no.3
HemMishra.
3] Seizure panchanama in respect of property 165
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
15 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

seized from the possession of accused no.6

Saibaba.
4] Seizure panchanama in respect of seizure of 179
propertyfromthepossessionofaccusedno.4
PrashantRahi.
5] Seizure panchanama in respect of seizure of 180
propertyfromthepossessionofaccusedno.5
VijayTirki.
6] Panchanama of proceeding in respect of 199
activitiesoffacebookaccountofaccusedno.3
HemMishra.
7] PanchanamatotheeffectthatCDwastaken 200
out from computer and it was put back in
sameconditionandwassealed.
8] Panchanama to the effect that the memory 201
cardwassealedwithlabelsandsignaturesof
panchas.
9] Panchanama to the effect that the packets 202
containing laptop, books and mobiles were
sealedwithlabelsandsignaturesofpanchas.
10] Panchanamainrespectofseizureof mobiles 203
ofaccusedno.6G.N.Saibaba.
11] Panchanamatotheeffectthatharddiskwas 204
sealedwithlabelsandsignaturesofpanchas.
12] Panchanamatotheeffectthatharddiskswere 205
sealedwithlabelsandsignaturesofpanchas
13] A letter to Forensic Laboratory, Mumbai for 211
examinationofmemorycardandreport.
14] Questionairinregardtothememorycardfor 211A
forensicsciencelab.
15] A letter to Forensic Laboratory, Mumbai for 212
examinationofelectronicgadgetsseizedfrom
thehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaand
report.
16] OralreportlodgedbytheinformantP.S.I.Atul 219
ShantaramAwhad(P.W.6).
17] F.I.R. lodged by the informant P.S.I. Atul 220
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
16 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ShantaramAwhad(P.W.6).
18] ArrestpanchanamasofaccusedNo.1Mahesh 227to229
Tirki, no.2 Pandu Narote and no.3 Hem
Mishra.
19] SpecialReportofPolice Station,Aheriabout 236
registrationofcrime.
20] Letterdated25.8.2013issuedbyP.W.11Suhas 237
BawcheforgettingCDR.
21] ArrestpanchanamasofaccusedNo.4&5. 239&240
22] Report addressed to P.I. Police Station Devri 241
dated1.9.2013.
23] Search warrant of house search of accused 244
no.6Saibabadated7.9.2013.
24] LettertoMorisnagarPoliceStationatDelhifor 252
providing police staff, computer expert and
videographerbyP.W.11SuhasBawche.
25] Noticesenttoaccusedno.6Saibabatoremain 256
present for investigation by P.W.11 Suhas
Bawche
26] Letter dated 17.9.2013 to S.P. Gadchiroli for 257
obtainingCDR.
27] Letterdated16.1.2014sent byP.W.11Suhas 262
Bawche to different mobile companies for
CDR.
28] AttestedcopyofchargesheetofNanakmatta 264
Police Station against accused no.4 Prashant
Rahi.
29] Scientific analysis report of CFSL, Mumbai 266
annexed with 15 pages in respect of 16 GB
memorycard seized from accused no.3 Hem
Mishra.
30] Scientific analysis report of CFSL, Mumbai 267
annexedwith247pagesinrespectofEx.1to
25 i.e. electronic gadgets seized from the
housesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.
31] Arrestpanchanamaofaccusedno.6Saibaba. 269
32] Extractsofstationdiaryentries. 275Ato175J
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
17 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

33] Attestedextractcopiesofmuddemalregister. 276Ato276E

34] Memorandum regarding questions and 278
answersputtoaccusedno.2PanduNarote.
35] Memorandum regarding questions and 279
answersputtoaccusedno.1MaheshTirki.
36] Confessional statement of accused no.1 280
MaheshTirki.
37] CertificatesI,IIandIIIaffixedtoconfessional 281to283
statementofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki.
38] Confessionalstatementofaccusedno.2Pandu 286
Narote.
39] CertificatesI,IIandIIIaffixedtoconfessional 287to289
statementofaccusedno.2PanduNarote.
40] Complaintmadebyaccusedno.1MaheshTirki 292
andno.2PanduNaroteregardingretractionof
confessionalstatement.
41] TheCDRofmobilephonenumbersofaccused 330to332
no.3HemMishraandno.4PrashantRahi.
42] Certificateus/65BoftheEvidenceAct. 333
43] CustomerapplicationformofmobileSIMcard 335
ofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.
44] Customer application forms of mobile SIM 336and337
cardsofaccusedno.3HemMishra.
45] Certificate dated 15.2.2014 u/s 65B of the 338
EvidenceAct.
46] Copy of the property register of Sessions 340
Court,Gadchiroli.
47] Letter dated 26.2.2015 to Director of Public 346
Prosecutor issued by Desk Officer for
independentreview.
48] IndependentreviewreceivedfromDirectorof 348
PublicProsecutor.
49] Sanctionorderdated6.4.2015forprosecution 349
ofaccusedno.6Saibaba.
50] Coveringletterwithsanction. 350
51] Letter dated 7.2.2014 to Director of Public 356
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
18 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Prosecutor issued by Desk Officer for

independentreview.
52] IndependentreviewreceivedfromDirectorof 358
PublicProsecutor.
53] Mirrorimagesretrievedfrom16GBmemory 372
cardofSandiskcompanysentalongwithletter
dated30.8.2013.
54] Letters issued by P.W.23 Bhavesh Nikam to 373&374
SDPOAherialongwithmirrorimagesofhard
disks.
55] Certificate dated 22.3.2016 by Head of 375
DepartmentAssistantDirectorofCyberCrime.
56] 16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompany. 376
57] harddisks. 377,381to384
58] Pendrives. 378to380
59] DVDs 387to394
60] CD 395
61] CDR details of mobile SIM card of accused 413
no.6Saibaba.
62] Customer application form for mobile SIM 418
cardofaccusedno.6Saibaba.
63] Telephone bill in the name of accused no.6 419
Saibaba.
64] Attested copy of ID card of accused no.6 420
Saibaba.

20] Thereafter, prosecution has closed its evidence by filing

pursisatExh.421.StatementunderSection313ofCr.P.C.ofaccused
no.1 Mahesh Tirki was recorded at Exh.426, accused no.2 Pandu
Narote at Exh.427, accused no.3 Hem Mishra at Exh.433, accused
no.4PrashantRahiatExh.429,accusedno.5VijayTirkiatExh.430
andaccusedno.6G.N.SaibabaatExh.437inwhichtheyhavedenied
the allegations. Accordingto accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2
PanduNarote,theirconfessionalstatementsbeforeJMFCAheriwere
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
19 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

recorded under the pressure of police and they retracted their

confession by filing application before JMFC Aheri vide Exhibit
no.292. Accordingtoaccusedno.3HemMishra,hewasarrestedat
BallarshaRailwaystationandnothingwasseizedfromhispossession
andhehasbeenfalselyimplicatedinthiscase.Accordingtoaccused
no.4 Prashant Rahi he was not arrested at Devri Chinchgad and
nothing was seized from his possession and he has been falsely
implicatedinthiscase.Accordingtoaccusedno.5VijayTirkihewas
not arrested at Devri Chinchgad and nothing was seized from his
possessionandhehasbeenfalselyimplicatedinthiscase.According
to accused no.6 G.N.Saibaba nothing was seized from his house
searchatDelhiandhehasbeenfalselyimplicatedinthiscase.

21] HeardlearnedSpecialPublicProsecutorShri.Sathianathan
fortheStateandlearnedAdvocateShri.GadlingfortheaccusedNos.1
to4&6andlearnedadvocateShri.P.C.SamaddarforaccusedNo.5
VijayTirki.Perusedoralanddocumentaryevidenceonrecord.Inthis
backdrop,thefollowingpointsariseformydeterminationtowhichI
haverecordedmyfindingsasunderforthereasonsgivenbelow:

Sr.No. Point Findings

1 Doesprosecutionprovethatonorpriorto Intheaffirmative
12.9.2013withinIndia,theaccusedNo.1
to 6 along with absconding accused
NarmadakkaandRamdarinpursuanceof
their criminal conspiracy,werethe active
members of banned organisation CPI
(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDF
under UAPA and found in possession of
printed naxal literature and circulated
information which is promotional
literatureofterroristsorganizationinthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
20 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

form of booklet, pamphlets,

correspondence,agenda,audiovideoclips
of such banned organization of terrorists
gang and found arranging meetings of
those members with underground naxals
andpassingmoneyforstrengtheningtheir
organization and circulating important
informationwhosemainobjectivewasto
incite the people and to create violence
and to spread disaffection towards
Government established by law and to
commitillegalactwithintentiontofurther
activitiestocommitconspiracyorattempt
to commit or advocate, abet or incite
people to create public disorder with
intent to threaten the unity, integrity,
security or sovereignty of India and
therebycommittedanoffencepunishable
under Section 13 of The Unlawful
Activities(Prevention)Act,1967readwith
Section120BoftheIndianPenalCode?

2 Doesprosecutionprovethatonorpriorto Intheaffirmative
12.9.2013withinIndia,theaccusedNo.1
to 6 along with absconding accused
NarmadakkaandRamdarinpursuanceof
their criminal conspiracy,werethe active
members of RDF, which is frontal
organization of CPI (Maoist) banned
organization under UAPA were found in
possessionofprintednaxalliteratureand
circulated information which is
promotional literature of terrorists
organization in the form of booklet,
pamphlets, correspondence, agenda,
audiovideo clips of such banned
organizationofterroristsgangandfound
arrangingmeetingsofthosemembersand
passing money and circulating important
informationwhosemainobjectivewasto
incite the people and to create violence
and to spread disaffection towards
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
21 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Government established by law and to

commitillegalactoranyact preparatory
tothecommissionofaterroristsactwith
intention to further the activities to
commit conspiracy or attempt to commit
oradvocate,abetandincitepeopletotake
toviolenceandcreatepublicdisorderwith
intent to threaten the unity, integrity,
security or sovereignty of India and
therebycommittedanoffencepunishable
under Section 18 of The Unlawful
Activities(Prevention)Act,1967readwith
Section120BoftheIndianPenalCode?

3 Doesprosecutionprovethatonorpriorto
12.9.2013withinIndia,theaccusedNo.1
to 6 along with absconding accused
NarmadakkaandRamdarinfurtheranceof
their criminal conspiracy,weretheactive
membersofbannedterroristsorganization
CPI (Maoist) and its frontal organization Intheaffirmative
RDFwerefoundinvolvedinterroristsacts
and thereby committed an offence
punishable under Section 20 of The
UnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967,
readwithSection120BoftheIndianPenal
Code?

4 Doesprosecutionprovethatonorpriorto Intheaffirmative
12.9.2013withinIndia,theaccusedNo.1
to 6 along with absconding accused
NarmadakkaandRamdarinfurtheranceof
their criminal conspiracy,weretheactive
membersofbannedterroristsorganization
CPI (Maoist) and its frontal organization
RDFunderUAPAwerefoundinpossession
of printed naxal literature and circulated
information which is promotional
literatureofterroristsorganizationinthe
form of booklet, pamphlets,
correspondence,agenda,audiovideoclips
of such banned organization of terrorists
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
22 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

gang and all of them associated

themselvesorprofessedtobeassociated,
withaterroristorganizationwithintention
tofurtheractivitiesrelatingtomembership
of banned terrorists organization CPI
(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF
and thereby committed an offence
punishable under Section 38 of The
UnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967
readwithSection120BoftheIndianPenal
Code??
5 Doesprosecutionprovethatonorpriorto
12.9.2013withinIndia,theaccusedNo.1
to 6 along with absconding accused
Narmadakka and Ramdar entered into
criminal conspiracy in pursuance of
agreement of commission of acts in
Gadchirolidistrictandotherplacessuchas
Delhi,Hyderabad,Telangana,Chhatisgarh
andotherplaceshavegivensupporttothe
banned terrorists organization CPI
(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF
with intention to further the activity of
such organisation, arranged, managed or
assisted in arranging or managing a
meetingwhichtheyknowis(i)tosupport
suchbannedorganisationor(ii)tofurther Intheaffirmative
theactivityofbannedorganisationor(iii)
tobeaddressedbyapersonorpersonsto
associateorprofesstobeassociatedwith
such banned organisation and with
intention to further the activitiesofsuch
banned organisation addressed a
meeting / meetings, authored or
published,distributedbooks,literaturefor
the purpose of encouraging support for
suchbannedorganisationortofurtherits
activityandtherebycommittedanoffence
punishable under Section 39 of The
UnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967
readwithSection120BoftheIndianPenal
Code?
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
23 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

6 Does prosecution proves that a valid

sanction has been granted by the
competent authority under Section 45 of
theUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,
1967inrespectofaccusedNo.1to5i.e.
MaheshTirki,PanduNarote,HemMishra,
Prashant Rahi & Vijay Tirki in Sessions
Case 13/2014 and in respect of accused
Intheaffirmative.
no. 6 in SessionsCase no.130/2015 for
taking cognizance of the offences
punishableunderSections13,18,20,38,
39ofTheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)
Act, 1967 r/w 120 of the Indian Penal
Code?
7 Whatorder? Asperfinalorder.

Pointnos.1to6:

22] In the present case, the accused nos.1 to 6 have been

chargedfortheoffencespunishableunderSections13,18,20,38,39
of UAPA read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The
allegationsagainsttheaccusednos.1to6arethattheybeingactive
membersofCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisation(RDF),abanned
organisationundertheUAPA,1967hatchedcriminalconspiracy,the
objectofthesaidconspiracywastocreateviolence,tocausepublic
disorderandtospreaddisaffectiontowardstheCentralGovernment
and the State Government and in pursuance of the said criminal
conspiracy accused nos.1to 6 were foundin possession ofprinted
naxal literature, circulating information which is promotional
literatureofterroristorganizationintheformofbooklets,pamphlets,
correspondence, writings, reports of the meetings, letters, emails,
speeches in audio, video and text formats contained in electronic
gadgets like CDs, DVDs, pendrives, harddisks, memorycards and
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
24 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

foundusingthesameforcirculationamongstthemembersofbanned
organisationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDFandother
personsforcreatingviolenceandcausingpublicdisorder.

23] The prosecution has led evidence in respect of accused

nos.1to6.Theevidenceledbytheprosecutionagainstaccusednos.1
to6canbeclassifiedunderthefollowingcircumstances

i] Accusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteandno.3Hem
Mishra were arrested on 22.8.2013 at about 6.00 p.m. at a
secluded place near Aheri Bus Stand in suspicious
circumstances.

ii] Personal search of accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki, no.2 Pandu

Naroteandno.3HemMishrawastaken.Fromthepossession
ofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkithreepamphletscontainingnaxal
literatureandfromthepossessionofno.2PanduNarotethe
articles like umbrella and newspaper usually used by naxal
asidentification code to recognise each other were seized.
From the possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra 16 GB
memorycard of Sandisk company containing incriminating
materialinrelationtonaxalmovementofbannedorganization
CPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDFintextformand
onecameraofKodak company alongwithchargercontaining
photographsofaccusedno.6Saibabaandotherarticleswere
seized.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
25 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

iii] Theaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandNo.2PanduNarotemade
confessionalstatementsbeforeJudicialMagistrateFirstClass,
AheriandtheywentalongwithP.W.9RajuAtramintheforestto
meet naxal lady Narmadakka and when they had been to
BallarshawithcashamountofRs.5lacs,P.W.9RajuAtramwas
withthem.

iv] From the house search of accused no.6 Saibaba at Delhi

extensiveelectronicgadgetslikeCDs,DVDs,pendrives,hard
disccontainingothernaxalliterature,letterscorrespondence,
writings, reports of meetings, letters, emails relating to a
bannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisation
RDFundertheUAPA1967,wereseized.

v] Activities of the facebook account of accused no.3 Hem

Mishra.

vi] Call records of mobile SIM nos.9873877513 &

8860601278 belongingtoaccusedno.3HemMishra,mobile
SIMno.8394875017belongingtoaccusedno.4PrashantRahi
and mobile SIM no.8800100490 belonging to accused no.6
Saibaba.

vii] The accused no.4 Prashant Rahi and no.5 Vijay Tirki were
found at Chichgad Tpoint Devri in suspicious circumstances
and accused no.4 Prashant Rahi was found in possession of
naxal literature in relation to naxal movement of banned
organizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
26 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

viii] Sanction order for prosecution of accused no.1 to 5 in

Sessioncaseno.13/2014foroffencepunishableunderSections
13,18,20,38,39ofUAPAandagainstaccusedno.6Saibabafor
theoffencepunishable underSections13,18,20,38,39of
UAPAinSessioncaseno.130/2015.

ix] Theelectronicgadgetsi.e.16GBmemorycardseizedfromthe
possessionofaccusedno.3HemMishraandCDs,DVDs,pen
drives,harddisksseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
SaibabaweresenttoCFSL,MumbaiforexaminationandCFSL
reporttothateffectalongwithsoftcopiesanddatafoundin
text form in 16 GB memorycardis at Exh.266(Arts.A17to
A21)and report regarding electronic data found in audio,
video,photographandtextform in CDs, pendrives, DVD,
memorycards,harddisksisatExh.267(Pagenos.1to247).

24] Asthereisachargeofconspiracyagainstaccusednos.1to
6,itisnecessarytodiscussevidenceledbytheprosecutionagainst
accusednos.1to6separatelyandfurtherastheevidenceledbythe
prosecutionagainstaccusednos.1to6isinterconnectedwitheach
otherinrespectofoffencespunishableunderSections13,18,20,38,
39ofUAPAreadwithSection120BofIPCinordertoavoidrepetition
offactsandevidencepointsno.1to6havebeenansweredtogether.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
27 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

REASONS

Caseagainstaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,accusedno.2
PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishra

25] ItisthecaseoftheprosecutionthatinformantAPIAtul
Avhad(P.W.6)received informationthataccusedno.2PanduNarote
andaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandtheirunknownassociateswere
providing secret information and some materials to CPI (Maoist)
banned organization, hence, they kept watch on their activities at
Aheri, Murewada and Etapalliarea. On 2282013atabout600
p.m.accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandaccusedno.2PanduNarotewere
foundstandingatasecludedplacenearbusstand,Aheriandabout
615p.m.onepersonhavingonecaponhisheadi.e.accusedno.3
HemMishracamethere.TheinformantAPIAtulAvhad(PW6)asked
themwhattheyweredoingatthatsecludedplace.Theygaveevasive
answers. Hence, he tookaccusedno.2Pandu Narote,accusedno.1
MaheshTirkiandaccusedno.3HemMishratoAheriPoliceStation
wherePoliceInspectorAnilBadgujar(P.W.10)waspresent.Then,he
askedtheirnamesinpresenceofpanchas.Onepersontoldhisname
MaheshTirki,secondtoldhisnamePanduNaroteandthirdperson
toldhisnameasHemKeshavdattaMishra.PIAnilBadgujar(P.W.10)
alsoaskedthemwhattheyweredoingatsecludedplace.Theygave
unsatisfactory answers about their presence. Hence, their personal
searchwastaken.

26] From the personalsearchofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki

followingarticleswerefound:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
28 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

i]ThreepamphletsregardingbannedCPIorganization,
ii]OneMicromaxcompanymobile,
iii]OnepocketpursecontainingRs.60/,
iv]Platformticketdated28521013and
v]Xeroxcopyofhiselectionidentitycard.

27] From the possession of accused no.2 Pandu Narote

followingarticleswerefound.
i]PassbookofStateBankofIndiainthenameofPanduNarote,
ii]BirthcertificateinthenameofKarishmaPandu,
iii]NewspaperLokmatdated20August,2013,
iv]Xeroxcopyofrationcard,
v]ResidenceandcastecertificateofPanduNarote,
vi]SchoolleavingcertificateofPanduPoraNarote,
vii]CastecertificateofPanduNarote,
viii]BirthcertificateinthenameofPanduPoraNarote,
ix]Oneumbrella,
x]Samsungmobile,
xi]Onemoneypurse(wallet),
xii]XeroxcopyofelectioncardofPanduPoraNarote,
xiii]PanCardofPanduPoraNarote,
xiv]DrivinglicenseofPanduPoraNarote,
xv]OneplatformticketofBallarshastationdated2852013,
xvi]OnelaminatedcolouredPancardofPanduPoraNaroteand
xvii]CashofRs.1480/

28] From the possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra

followingarticleswerefound:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
29 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

i] 16GBmemorycardofSandiskComapny(Art.137)
ii] Onecamerawithcharger(Art.30)
iii] OneCentralLibrarymembershipcard(Art.33),
iv] OneStateBankATMcardwithcoverinthenameofHem
Mishra(Art.34A)
v] OneidentitycardofJawaharlalNeharuUniversityinthe
nameofHemMishrawithhisphoto(Art.35)
vi] OnetravelcardofDelhiMetro(Art.36)
vii] OnetrainticketfromNewDelhitoBallarshadated
1982013(Exh.37)
viii] OnexeroxcopyofelectionI.D.inthenameofHem
Mishra(Art.38)
ix] OnedailynewspaperSaharadated19.8.2013,
x] CashamountofRs.7500/

29] Thereafter, all those articles were seized under seizure

panchanamaatExh.137andthepropertyseizedfromaccusedno.1
MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishrawasdeposited
inMalkhanaofAheriPoliceStationbyPIAnilBadgujar(P.W.10)with
MuddemalClerkGaneshRathod(P.W.13)andP.W.13GaneshRathod
received property of Crime no.3017/2013in the Malkhanaandhe
gave property no.12/2013 to it and taken note of property in
muddemalregisterandcopyofthesaidregisterisfiledonrecordat
Exh.276A.

30] Thereafter16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanywas
senttoCFSL,MumbaiforexaminationbyInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11
SuhasBawchethroughcarrierRavindraKumbhare(P.W.5)forgetting
soft copies andBhaveshNikam(P.W.21),ScientificExpert ofCFSL,
Mumbai examined the same and soft copies were sent to Police
StationAherithroughRavindraKumbhare(P.W.5)andthesamewere
depositedintheMalkhanaofAheriPoliceStation.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
30 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

31] The Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche opened

thosesoftcopiesinpresenceofpanchP.W.4Shrikantwiththehelpof
cardreader on the computer of Police Station, Aheri and found
incriminating correspondence between members of banned
organization CPI (Maoist) and its frontal organization RDF and
furthertheyfound10to12PDFfilesprotectedbysecretpassword
thereafter printouts of five documents were taken out and to that
effect panchanama Exh.201 was prepared and thereafter, P.W.11
SuhasBawchesentthehardcopiestoCFSL,Mumbaiforcertification
andCFSL Mumbaicertifiedthesameandthehardcopies(Articles
A17toA21)arefiledonrecordalongwithreportatExh.266.

32] Duringinvestigation,accusedno.3HemMishraopened
his facebook account in front of Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas
BawcheandpanchwitnessP.W.4ShrikantGaddewarandscreenshots
ofallactivitiesonfacebookaccountofaccusedno.3Hemweretaken
andtheyareatArts.A1toA16.Theevidenceinrespectofactivities
onfacebookaccountofaccusedno.3HemMishrawillbediscussed
lateron.

33] Duringinvestigation,accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2
PanduNarotemadeconfessionalstatementsbeforeMagistratewhich
have been recorded by P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas, J.M.F.C., Aheri at
Exh.280and286respectively.

EVIDENCE
34] To prove the above allegations against accused no.1
MaheshTirki,No.2PanduNaroteandNo.3HemMishraprosecution
reliedontheevidenceoffollowingwitnesses:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
31 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Sr. P.W. NameofWitness Exh.No.

No. No.
1 P.W.1 Santosh Bawne, panch witness on 136
seizurepanchanama.
2 P.W.6 Atul Avhad, informant and 218
InvestigatingOfficer.
3 P.W.9 Raju Poriya Atram, the witness who 225
accompaniedaccusedno.1Maheshand
no.2 Pandu at Ballarsha Railway
station.
4 P.W.10 AnilDigambarBadgujar,PoliceOfficer. 226
5 P.W.13 Ganesh Keshav Rathod, Muddemal 297
ClerkofAheriPoliceStation.
6 P.W.15 Narendra Shitalprasad Dube, Station 308
DiaryDutyAmaldar.

Besides,thisprosecutionreliedonfollowingdocuments.

Sr.No. Particularsofdocuments Exhs.

1 Seizurepanchanama 137
2 CopyofMuddemalregister 276D
3 CopyofStationDiary 275A

35] PSIAtulShantaramAwhad(P.W.6)whoistheinformantin
the present case was attached to Special Branch, Gadchiroli in his
examinationatExh.218hasstatedthathehadreceivedinformation
thataccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandaccusedno.2PanduNarotewere
workingforprohibitedbannedorganizationCPIMaoistandtheywere
supplying material to the underground naxalites and were giving
protectiontothemandweretakingthemfromoneplacetoanother
place safely and exchanging information regarding the Maoist
organizationandhence,theywerekeepingwatchonthem inthe
areaofEtapalli,AheriandMurewada. Healsoreceivedsecretand
reliableinformationthataccusedno.2PanduNaroteandaccusedno.1
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
32 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Mahesh Tirki and their unknown associates were providing secret

information and some materials to CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organisation RDF. Then on 2282013at about 600p.m.accused
no.1MaheshTirkiandaccusedno.2PanduNarotewerestandingata
secludedplacenearbusstandAheriandthereafter,atabout615p.m.
onepersonhavingonecaponhisheadcamethereandtheystarted
talking with each other suspiciously. Then he took accused no.2
PanduNarote,accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandthatthirdpersonwho
isaccusedno.3HemMishratoAheriPoliceStationandaskedtheir
namesinpresenceofpanchas.Duringinterrogationonepersontold
hisnameMaheshTirki(accusedno.1),secondtoldhisnamePandu
Narote (accused no.2) and third person told his name as Hem
Keshavdatta Mishra (accused no.3). Police Inspector Anil Badgujar
(P.W.10)whowasattachedtoAheriPoliceStationwaspresentatthat
timeinthepolicestation.Heaskedtheseaccusedpersonsastowhat
they were doing at secluded place, to which accused gave
unsatisfactoryanswers.

36] Thenfirstly,personalsearchofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki
wastakenandfromhispersonalsearch threepamphletsregarding
bannedCPI(Maoist)organization,oneMicromaxmobile,onepocket
pursecontainingRs.60/andplatformticketdated28521013were
found.

37] Secondly,personalsearchof accusedno.2PanduNarote

was also taken and from his personal search, platform ticket of
BallarshaRailwaydated2852013,onemobileofSamsungcompany
and cash of Rs.1400/ and his election identity card and school
leavingandbirthcertificatewerefound.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
33 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

38] Thirdly, he took personal search of accused no.3 Hem

MishraandcashofRs.7,500/,KodakCamera,clothbag,whitecap,
onespeccaseofblackcolour,onenewspaperofSahara,dated198
2013,oneredcolouredtowel,bluecolourednapkin,oneshirtwith
lining, one gray half pant, one yellow coloured Tshirt, one dark
brownpant,onemoneypurse,pancard,twoidentitycardsofJNU
University, one SBI ATM card, one travel card ofDelhiMetro,one
DelhitoBallarshaRailwayticketdated19.8.2013andxeroxcopyof
electionidentitycardi.e.Arts.21to38werefound.

39] Allabovearticleswereseizedinthepresenceofpanchas
underseizurepanchanamaExh.137drawnintheirpresenceinPolice
Station,AheriandthepropertywastakenintocustodybyP.W.10P.I.
AnilBadgujarandon enquirywithaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiand
no.2PanduNarote,theytoldthatnaxalladyDVCNarmadakkaofCPI
Maoist had told them that one person was coming from Delhi
alongwithimportantthingsandheshouldbebroughttoMurewada
forestsafelyandforthatpurpose,theyweresenttoAheribusstand.

40] ThiswitnessidentifiedthearticlesbeforetheCourtwhich
wereseizedfromthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki.
Thesearticlesareasunder:

i] OneplatformticketofBallarsha(Art.18),
ii] Onexeroxcopyofidentitycard(Art.19),
iii] OnemobileofMacromaxcompany(Art.138)
iv] Threepamphlets(Art.139to141)

41] HefurtheridentifiedthearticlesbeforetheCourtwhich
wereseizedfromthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.2PanduNarote.
Thesearticlesareasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
34 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

i] OnepassbookofStateBankofIndiainthenameof
PanduNarote(Art.1)
ii] BirthcertificateinthenameofKarishmaPandu(Art.2)
iii] Lokmatnewspaperdated20August,2013(Art.3)
iv] Xeroxcopyofrationcard(Art.4)
v] ResidenceandcastecertificateofPanduNarote(Art.5)
vi] SchoolleavingcertificateofPanduPoraNarote(Art.6)
vii] CastecertificateofPanduNarote(Art.7)
viii] BirthcertificateinthenameofPanduPoraNarote(Art.8)
ix] Oneumbrella(Art.9)
x] Samsungmobile(Art.10)
xi] Onemoneypurse(Art.11)
xii] XeroxcopyofelectioncardofPanduPoraNarote(Art.12)
xiii] PanCardofPanduPoraNarote(Art.13)
xiv] DrivinglicenseofPanduP.Narote(Art.14)
xv] OneplatformticketofBallarshastationdated2852013
(Art.15)
xvi] OnelaminatedcolouredPancardofPanduPoraNarote
(Art.16)

42] HefurtheridentifiedthearticlesbeforetheCourtwhich
wereseizedfromthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.3HemMishra.
Thesearticlesareasunder:

i] Brown coloured envelop having seal of the court, one

sealedenvelop(Art.39)bearingsealandsignatureofScientific
OfficerForensicScienceLaboratoryGovernmentofMaharashtra
Mumbaidated1522014

ii] Whiteenvelop(Exh.138),
iii] Sandiskmemorycardof16GB(Art.137).

43] He stated that the above articles were seized from the
possessionofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,accusedno.2PanduNarote
and accused no.3 Hem Mishra in presence of panchas and after
completing panchanama FIR was lodged by him vide Crime
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
35 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

no.3017/2013atPoliceStation,Aheriandfurtherinvestigationwas
carriedoutbyP.W.11SDPOSuhasBawche.

44] Duringcrossexamination,headmittedthat carboncopy

ofprintedFIRmighthavebeenpreparedandhecannotsaywhether
theentriesinColumn3Subclause(b)&(c)areindifferentinkand
thewriterisalsodifferent. Hewasshownpageno.313ofcarbon
copyofFIR(Exh.221). Hestatedthatthesignaturesonthecarbon
copyisoriginalandentryinColumn3(b)(c)arewrittensubsequently.
HeadmittedthatinColumn3clause(c)therearesomeoverwritings
andinthecarboncopytheyeariswrittenwiththehelpofcarbonbut
theentryingeneraldiaryiswritteninhandwritingandthesaidthree
entriesareindifferentink.Hedoesnotrememberwhethertheentire
FIRwasscribedandthenthesethreeentrieswerewritten.Hestated
thattheFIRwasscribedbyP.W.15NarendraDubeandhedoesnot
remember who was the station diary incharge on the day when
presentFIRwasregistered.Theydidnottakeentryinstationdiary
inPoliceStation,Aheriwhentheaccusedweregivingunsatisfactory
answers.

45] He admittedthat the information wasgiven through PI

AnilBadgujar(P.W.10)toShitalprasadDubey(P.W.15).Hedoesnot
rememberwhetherDubey(P.W.15)hadwrittensomethingwhenthe
informationwaspassedthroughhim. Hemighthavetaken2to3
minutesforpassingtheinformationandP.W.10P.I.Badgujargavethe
sameinformationtoDubey.P.W.10PIBadgujarsaidthatFIRwasto
be registered and they simultaneously started making panchanama
andhespecificallydidnotgiveinstructionstoDubeytoregisterFIR.
HeadmittedthatFIRwastypedbywriterofP.W.10PIBadgujarand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
36 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

hehasnotstatedinFIRthatwhenthepersonalsearchofaccusedwas
startedandbywhomitwastakenandnameofpanchasandtitlesof
pamphletsallegedtobeseizedfromaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiand
company,makeanduniqueidentificationmarkofMemorycard.He
admittedthatinMaoistgroupseverypartymemberhasaliasname
andnormallytheyusealiasname.

46] He denied that some portion of printed FIR was kept

blankandthereafterhesignedthesameandhestatedthatasthe
incidenttookplacebefore2years,hedoesnotrememberexactlyand
theentryinColumn3(b)andtimethereinandcolumn3(c)areanti
timeandwrittensubsequentlyonfuturedates.Hedeniedthaton22
82013 he did not arrest accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki, no.2 Pandu
Naroteandno.3HemMishranearAheribusstandandtheywerenot
takentoPoliceStationandaccusedno.3HemMishrawasarrestedon
BallarshaRailwayStationatabout930p.m.on2082013andhe
waskeptinillegalcustodyfortwodaysandon2382013allaccused
were taken to Aheri Police Station and they were arrested. He
denied that nothing was seized from the possession of any of the
accusedandfalsepanchanamawaspreparedwiththehelpofhabitual
panchas and till 2382013 they were not taken to Aheri Police
Stationandtheywerenotarrested.Hedeniedthatasnopanchanama
waspreparedpriortolodgingofFIR,hence,itwasnotmentionedin
theFIRandon22.8.2013P.W.10PIBadgujarandP.W.15Dubeywere
notpresentinAheriPoliceStation.

47] ShriAnilDigambarBadgujar(P.W.10)isthePoliceOfficer
attached to Aheri Police Station who recorded FIR lodged by the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
37 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

informantAtulAvhad(P.W.6)hasstatedinhisexaminationatExh.226
thaton2282013PSIAtulAvhad(P.W.6)cametoAheriPoliceStation
alongwiththree accusedpersons(Accusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2
PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishra)andPSIAtulAvhadtoldthat
accusednos.1to3were having concernwithMaoistorganization
andtheywereexchangingsomeimportantmessagesandimportant
thingsbetweenthemandtheyfoundtwopersonsatAheribusstopin
secludedplace.Hence,hecalledtwopanchasandtooktheirpersonal
search.OnepersontoldhisnameasMaheshTirki,secondtoldhis
nameasPanduNaroteandthirdtoldhisnameasHemMishra. He
stated that from the possession of accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki one
moneypurseofbrowncolourcontaining cashofRs.60/, platform
ticketdated2852013Art.17,onexeroxcopyofidentitycardArt.19,
one platform ticket of Ballarsha Art.18, one mobile of Macromax
company Art.138 and three naxalpamphletsArts.139to141were
seizedunderseizurepanchanamaExh.137.

48] Thereafter,hetookpersonalsearchofaccusedno.2Pandu
NaroteandfromhispossessioncashofRs.1,400/,electionidentity
card,Art.3 Lokmat newspaperdated20thAugust,2013,Art.4xerox
copy of ration card, Art.5 residence and caste certificate of Pandu
Narote,Art.6SchoolleavingcertificateofPanduPoraNarote,Art.7
castecertificateofPanduNarote,Art.8birthcertificateinthenameof
Pandu Pora Narote, Art.2, birth certificate in the name of Ku.
Karishma Pandu Narote, one money purse Art.11, xerox copy of
electioncardofPanduPoraNarote,PanCardofPanduPoraNarote
Art.13,drivinglicenseofPanduP.NaroteArt.14,oneplatformticket
ofBallarshastationdated2852013Art.15,onelaminatedcoloured
PancardofPanduPoraNaroteArt.16,oneumbrellaArt.9,onepass
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
38 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

bookofStateBankofIndiainthenameofPanduNaroteArt.1,the
documents,UmbrellaandPassbookandoneplasticpacketofKaveri
SeedsArt.143wereseized.

49] Thereafter,hetook personalsearchofaccusedno.3Hem

Mishra in presence of panchas and during the personal search,
accused no.3 Hem Mishra found in possession of incriminating
articlesincluding16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyandkodak
camera alongwith charger those were seized in presence of panch
witnessP.W.1SantoshBawneunderseizure panchanama(Exh.137)
andseizedarticlesweresealed.Heidentifiedthearticlesi.e.16GB
memorycard of Sandisk company at Art.137, Pan card of accused
no.3HemMishraatArt.32,twoIdentitycardsofJNUUniversityat
Art.33and35,oneATMcardatArt.34A,travelcardofDelhiMetroat
Art.36,RailwayticketofDelhitoBallarshaatArt.37dated19.8.2013
andxeroxcopyofelectionidentitycardatArt.38beforetheCourt.

50] He stated that all articles seized from possession of

accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and accused no.2 Pandu Narote were
sealed in presence of panchas under panchanama Exh.137 dated
2282013andaftercompletionofpanchanama,FIRwaslodgedby
P.W.6PSIAvhadvideCrimeno.3017/2013atPoliceStation,Aheri.

51] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel. Inhiscrossexaminationheadmittedthatpanchanamasof
personalsearchofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteand
no.3 Hem Mishra were made by different police officers and
panchanamas (Exh.227 to 229) bear the date 2382013 and in
panchanamas(Exh.227to229)FIRnumber,dateofarrestandtime
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
39 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

arewrittenindifferenthandwritinganddifferentpenanditoccurred
bymistake.Headmittedthatinthepanchanama,itisnotwrittenthat
threepamphletsArt.139to141wereseizedfromthehandofaccused
no.1MaheshTirki.Headmittedthathewasinchargeofinvestigation
till 2582013 and further investigation was handed over to SDPO
SuhasBawche(P.W.11)andastheoffencewasregisteredunderUAPA,
hehaddrawnonlythepanchanamaandthereafterinvestigationwas
handedovertoSDPOSuhasBawche(P.W.11).Headmittedthathe
didnotseethedatainthememorycardbyopeningitoncomputeror
laptopandhewasnotknowingthefactthatthedatainmemorycard
was protected by password and he came to know about the same
whenthememorycardwassenttoCFSL.

52] Hedeniedthaton2282013hewasnotpresentinthe
PoliceStation,andhence,onpanchanamathedate2382013was
written and till preparation of panchanama, FIR and station diary
entries were not taken down and nothing was seized from the
possessionofanyoftheaccusedandfalsepanchanamawasprepared
withthe help ofhabitualpanchasandtill2382013theywerenot
takentoAheriP.S.andon2282013healongwithDubeywasnot
presentinAheriP.S.andhedeniedthathedeposedfalselyagainstthe
accusedattheinstanceofSDPOP.W.11SuhasBawche. Hedenied
thatnopamphletswerefoundinpossessionofaccusedno.1Mahesh
andthosewerebroughtsubsequentlytosupportthepanchanama.

53] Theevidenceofpanchwitness SantoshBawne(P.W.1) in
whosepresencearticleswereseizedfromthepossessionofaccused
no.1 Mahesh Tirki, No.2 Pandu Narote and no.3 Hem Mishra was
recordedon27.10.2015andthereafter,prosecutionhasfiledoriginal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
40 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

sanction order (Exh.349) in respect of accused no.6 Saibaba on

record and on 14.12.2015 prosecution filed application for re
examinationofthiswitnessvideExh.151.Thedefenceadvocatefor
accusedNo.6gavenoobjectionforreexamination,hencebypassing
orderonExh.151on4.1.2016thewitnessSantoshBawne(P.W.1)was
reexaminedon5.1.2016atExh.136.

54] SantoshNanajiBawne(P.W.1)isthepanchwitnessonthe
pointofpersonalsearchofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,No.2Pandu
NaroteandNo.3HemMishra.InhisexaminationinchiefatExh.136
Santosh (P.W.1) has stated thathewascalledon 2282013inthe
Policestation,Aheriforthepurposeoftakingpersonalsearchofthree
accusedpersonswhowerearrestedbyAheripoliceandhehadgone
toAheriPoliceStationbetween600to630p.m.intheeveningand
anotherpanch witnessUmajiwaspresentthere,accusednos.1to3
werepresentinPoliceStationandpolicefirstaskedthenametothree
accusedpersonsandthereaftertookpersonalsearchofeachaccused
person in his presence, these persons told their names as Mahesh
Tirki,PanduNarote andHemMishra(Accusedno.1Mahesh,no.2
Panduandno.3HemMishra).

55] Hestatedthatpolicetookpersonalsearchofaccusedno.1
MaheshTirkiandfromhispossessionthreepaperpamphlets(Articles
139to141),onemobilephone,cashamountRs.60/,platformticket
ofBallarshaRailwaystationandelectionidentitycardwereseized.
Thereafter,policetookpersonalsearchofaccusedno.2PanduNarote
andfromhispossession,onemobilephone,cashofRs.1480/from
the backside pocket of his trouser, one bank passbook, domicile
certificate, hisbirth certificate andbirthcertificateofhisdaughter,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
41 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

oneumbrella,oneplatformticketofBalarshastation,oneduplicate
driving license of four wheeler and his election identity card were
seized. ThereafterpolicetookpersonalsearchofaccusedNo.3and
seizurepanchanamatothateffectwaspreparedatExh.137.Hehas
correctly identified accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and accused no.2
Pandu Narote and accused No.3 Hem Mishra present before the
Court.

56] Santosh Nanaji Bawne (P.W.1) identified all the articles

beforetheCourtwhichwereseizedfrompersonalsearchofaccused
no.2PanduNarote.Theseareasunder:

i] OnepassbookofStateBankofIndiainthenameof
PanduNarote(Art.1)
ii] BirthcertificateinthenameofKarishmaPandu(Art.2)
iii] Lokmatnewspaperdated20August,2013(Art.3)
iv] Xeroxcopyofrationcard(Art.4)
v] ResidenceandcastecertificateofPanduNarote(Art.5)
vi] SchoolleavingcertificateofPanduPoraNarote(Art.6)
vii] CastecertificateofPanduNarote(Art.7)
viii] BirthcertificateinthenameofPanduPoraNarote(Art.8)
ix] Oneumbrella(Art.9)
x] Samsungmobile(Art.10)
xi] Onemoneypurse(Art.11)
xii] XeroxcopyofelectioncardofPanduPoraNarote(Art.12)
xiii] PanCardofPanduPoraNarote(Art.13)
xiv] DrivinglicenseofPanduP.Narote(Art.14)
xv] OneplatformticketofBallarshastationdated2852013
(Art.15)
xvi] OnelaminatedcolouredPancardofPanduPoraNarote
(Art.16)

57] He further identified all the articles before the Court

whichwereseizedfromthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirki.Theseareasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
42 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

i] Micromaxcompanyandonebrowncolouredmoney
purseseizedfromthetrouserofMaheshTirki(Art.17)
ii] OneplatformticketofBallarshadated2852013
(Art.18)
iii] OnexeroxcopyofelectioncardinthenameofMahesh
KarimanTirki(Art.19)

58] Santosh Nanaji Bawne (P.W.1) further identified all the

articlesbeforetheCourtwhichwereseizedfromthepersonalsearch
ofaccusedno.3HemMishra.Theseareasunder:
i] 16GBmemorycardofSandiskComapny(Art.137)
ii] Onecamerawithcharger(Art.30)
iii] OneCentralLibrarymembershipcard(Art.33),
iv] OneStateBankATMcardwithcoverinthenameofHem
Mishra(Art.34A)
v] OneidentitycardofJawaharlalNeharuUniversityinthe
nameofHemMishramwithhisphoto(Art.35)
vi] OnetravelcardofDelhiMetro(Art.36)
vii] OnetrainticketfromNewDelhitoBallarshadated
1982013(Exh.37)
viii] OnexeroxcopyofelectionI.D.inthenameofHem
Mishra(Art.38)

59] SantoshNanajiBawne(P.W.1)wascrossexaminedbythe
learneddefencecounsel.Inhiscrossexamination,headmittedthat
aftersigningthepanchanamahewaspresentinpolicestationfor10
minutesandcontentsofExh.138werewrittenentirelyinhispresence
andthereafterhesignedonit. Headmittedthathesignedonthe
panchanama i.e. on two papers and that after signing the
panchanama, he put his signature on envelop. He admitted that
thereisroadonbothsidesandtherearepanstallsandhotelnear
AheribusstandandP.W.10PIAnilBadgujardidnotpersonallycome
to call him but one Major called him. He admitted that in the
panchanamaitiswrittenthatP.W.10AnilBadgujarhadcalledhimin
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
43 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

police station and one Major Dube (P.W.15) told him that he was
calledbyP.W.10AnilBadgujarandDubeMajor(P.W.15)hadbeento
himwiththemessageofAnilBadgujar.Headmittedthathedidnot
make any enquiry with police as to which questions were put to
accusedwhowerearrestedbythemandinthepanchanamaitwas
writtenthattherewerethreepaperpamphletsinthehandofaccused
no.1MaheshTirki.Headmittedthatbeforerecordingofhisevidence
hehadnooccasiontoknowpoliceofficerRameshDhumal(P.W.23)by
faceandhedidnotmeetpoliceofficerDhumalon472014inPolice
Station, Aheri and on 1172014 also he did not meet him. He
admittedthathedidnotgotoAheriPoliceStationon472014andin
July2014hehadbeentoAheriPoliceStationforonepanchanama
andhedidnotrememberthenameofaccusedinthatcaseandfor
whatpurposehehadbeentoAheriPoliceStationinJuly,2014.

60] Santosh Nanaji Bawne (P.W.1) admitted that he was in

serviceofHomeguardatAheriPoliceStationforlastthreeyearsand
heisinserviceofHomeguardonthedayofrecordingofhisevidence
andhedoesnothavepersonalknowledgeaboutdigitalstoragemedia
andhedoesnotknowdifferencebetweencardreader,bluetoothpen
drive and memorycard andhe cannot identifythe unique identity
storage capacity of the different electronic media appliances. He
denied that he had signed on the plain packet and he is habitual
panch of police and Dube (P.W.15) had requested him to act as a
panch and he was not present in Police Station at the time of
preparing panchanama and Major Dube (P.W.15) had taken his
signaturesonblankpapersandnothingwasseizedinhispresence
from the possession of any of the accused before the court. The
omission regarding the word hand is brought on record by the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
44 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

defence. Hedeniedthatnothingwasfoundinthehandofaccused
no.1MaheshTirkiandhencethe word'hand'isnotwritteninthe
panchanama.Hedeniedthathestatedfalselyaboutthecontentsof
panchanamaandhehadnotgonetopolicestationandnothingwas
seizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2Pandu
Naroteandno.3HemMishra.Hedeniedthatpanchanama(Exh.137)
waspreparedbyPoliceOfficerKawleandP.W.23RameshDhumalin
his presence. He denied that on 2282013 no panchanama was
preparedinhispresenceandhissignatureswerealsonottakenand
panchanama Exh.137 does not bear his signature and he was not
presentatthetimeofanypanchanamaandnothingwasseizedinhis
presence.

StationHouseOfficer[S.H.O.]

61] ASINarendraShitalprasadDube(P.W.no.15)wasattached
to Police Station, Aheri as a Station Diary incharge and in his
examinationatExh.308hasstatedthaton2282013hewasattached
to Police Station, Aheri, District Gadchiroli and he was on station
diary duty from 1800 hours to2200hoursandat that time,PSI
Avhad(P.W.6)hadcomeinPoliceStation,Aheriwiththreesuspected
persons and took them in chamber ofP.W.10PIAnil Badgujar. PI
Badgujar(P.W.10)toldhimtotakeentryinthestationdiaryabout
thosethreepersonsandaccordinglyhetookentryno.29/2013at18
35hoursvideExh.275Aandthereafter,PIAnilBadgujar(P.W.10)told
himthatinformantPSIAtulAvhad(P.W.6)cametohimandlodged
reportagainstthosepersonsvideExh.219andonthebasisofthat
report, he registered FIR vide Crime no.3017/2013 against the
accusedpersons.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
45 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

62] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel.Inhiscrossexaminationheadmittedthatthesealofpolice
stationisinthecustodyofMalkhanaMoharirandhedoesnotknow
whether there is movement register of seal in police station. He
deniedthatreportExh.220andFIRExh.221werepreparedon238
2013at200p.m.attheinstanceofhissuperiorhestatedthatafter
seizureofthemuddemalarticlesfromthepersonalsearchofaccused
no.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishrathose
weredepositedbyPoliceInspectorAnilBagujar(P.W.10)withGanesh
Rathod(P.W.13),MuddemalClerkofAheriPoliceStation.

MuddemalClerk

63] Ganesh Keshav Rathod (P.W.13), who was working as

MuddemalClerkofAheriPoliceStationinhisexaminationatExh.297
statedthatinthemonthofAugust2013hewasattachedtoPolice
Station,AheriasMuddemalMoharir(PropertyClerk)andon228
2013PoliceInspectorAnilBadgujar(P.W.10)ofAheriPoliceStation
depositedpropertyofCrimeno.3017/2013intheMalkhanaandhe
receivedthesameandgavepropertyno.12/2013toitandtakennote
ofpropertyinmuddemalregisterandcopyofthesaidregisterisfiled
onrecordatExh.276Aandoutofthispropertythreepamphletswere
taken out and he had given the same to Mr.Badgujar (P.W.10) for
attaching the same with chargesheet and entry to that effect was
takeninmuddemalregister.Thosepamphletswererelatingtonaxal
activitiesandhehasidentifiedthesameatArticlesno.139,140and
141.Hestatedthathedepositedthesaidmuddemalon13102015
inSessionsCourt,GadchiroliandpreparedinvoicechallanExh.135
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
46 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

andthesamewasverifiedbythePropertyClerkofDistrictCourtand
gavereceiptaboutdepositingofpropertyoncarboncopyofinvoice
challan(Exh.302).HebroughttheoriginalregisterbeforetheCourt
andthecopiesarefiledonrecord,thosewereverifiedfromoriginal
registerandfoundtobecorrect.

64] OnperusalofextractofmuddemalregisteratExh.276Ait
reveals that in the entry no.12/2013 dated 22.8.2013 there is
description of seized property in crime no.3017/2013 seized from
accusedno.1MaheshTirkiwhichisasunder:

i] OnepamphletwritteninredinkwrittenbyCPI(Maoist)
ii] One pamphlet of heading, Amar Shahidoko Lal Salam by
DandakaryanyaZonelCommitteeCPI(Maoist)I
iii] Pamphlet in respect of Khairlanji incident of CPI (Maoist)
MaharashtraState
iv] OneMicromaxmobile
v] onepacketcontainingcashRs.60/andoneplatformticketdtd
28.5.2013 of Ballarshah Railwaystation, xerox of election
votingcard.

65] The property seizedfromaccusedno.2Pandu Narote is

mentionedasunder:

i] oneSamsungmobile,
ii] onepackethavingcashRs.1480/,xeroxofelectioncard,RC
book ofvehicleno.MH33/K9656,pancard,platformticketof
BallarshahRailwaystationdt28.5.2013,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
47 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

iii] one plastic bag containing pass book, birth certificate, birth
certificate of accused Pandu, leaving certificate, domicile
certificate,rationcard,lokmatpaper,umbrella.

66] The property seized from accused no.3 Hem Mishra is

mentionedasunder:

i] AmountRs.7700/,16GBSandiskmemorycard,Railwayticket
ofBallarshahtoDelhidt.19.8.2013,ATMcardofSBI,pancard,
electioncard,IcardofJawaharlalNeharuUniversityetc.
ii] OneKodakcompanydigitalcamerawithcharger
iii] Onebagcontainingclothes,speccover,whitecap,newspaperdt
19.8.2013 etc. In column no.11, it is mentioned that said
propertiesweredepositedon13.10.2015intheCourt.

67] He was crossexamined by the learned defence counsel

andinhiscrossexaminationheadmittedthathecannotsaywithout
seeingtheregisterastowhohaddepositedthepropertywithhimand
inwhichCrimenumberandhedoesn'tknowwhetherthenameofthe
officerwithCrimenumberismentionedandon12.8.2013hemade
last entry prior to the entry in crime no.3017/2013 and from
12.8.2013 to 8.9.2013 there are only two entries regarding two
crimes. Headmittedthatintheinvoicechallanitisnotmentioned
thatpropertywassealedandmakeofthesealwasnotmentionedand
hedidnotmakeentryinwritingaboutthefactthattheclerkofthe
District court asked him to open the seal while depositing the
property. Headmittedthatinmuddemalregisterthereisnoentry
abouthandingoverofthreepamphletstoShriBadgujar(P.W.10)and
therearesomeoverwritingsinthemuddemalregisterandthesaid
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
48 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

overwritingsweremadebyhimattwoplacesandwhentheproperty
wasdepositedinMalkhanaatthattime,itwassealedandmakeof
thesealwasnotmentioned.Hewasshownmuddemalregisterand
entrydated26.8.2013whichisinhishandwritingandthenameof
P.W.5RavindraKumbharewaswrittenthereon.

68] Hedeniedthatfromtimetotimehedidnothandoverthe
property to carrier and received the same and all these entries in
MuddemalregisterweremadeattheinstanceofP.W.11ShriBawche.
Hefurtherdeniedthatasthepropertywasnotinsealedcondition
andmakeofthesealwasnotmentioned,hencehedidnotmention
thesameinmuddemalregister.

Independentwitness

69] Raju Poriya Atram (P.W.9) is a worker in Ballarpur

Industries Limited and Paper Mill. In his examinationinchief at
Exh.225hehasstatedthathewasdoingthejobofBamboocutting
androadworkandhewasSupervisorinBallarpurIndustriesLimited
and Paper Mill Ltd. In the year 2007 he was transferred from
BhamragadrangetoJambiyagattaandintheyear2013therewasa
camp at Murewada where he came in contact with accused no.2
PanduNaroteandaccusedno.1MaheshTirki.Hestatedthatoneday
accused no.2 Pandu Narote came to him and told that lady naxal
Narmadakkahadcalledhimandhetoldaccusedno.2PanduNarote
that he would go with him after 23 days and after 23 days he
alongwithaccusedno.2PanduwenttoforestareaofTodalgattaon
motorcycleandreachedthereatabout700p.m.andafterhalfan
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
49 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

hour, one lady by name Narmadakka came there, he was not

knowingherandhecouldnotidentifyherasitwasdark.

70] Hestatedthataccusedno.2PanduNarotetoldhimthat
sheisNarmadakkaandsheaskedhimthatwhetherhewouldhand
overRs.5Lakhstoaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarote
by meeting at Ballarsha Railway Station and Narmadakka handed
overmoneyinthepacketandhedidnotcountthesaidmoney.He
statedthaton27thofthatmonthaccusedno.2Panduandaccused
no.1MaheshhadcometohishouseatAlapalliandtoldhimthathe
should come at Ballarsha Railway Station along with said money
which he had receivedfromNarmadakkaandon next dayleft his
house. On 2952013 he left by bus at 600 a.m. and reached
BallarshaRailwayStation at1000a.m.,accusedno.1Maheshand
no.2PanduweresittinginthehallofRailwayStation,hewentand
satwiththemandthereaftertwounknownpersonscamethereand
accused no.2 Pandu went to them and discussed with them and
thereafter, accused no.2 Pandu came to him and took the money
packetandgavetoonepersonoutofthem.Outofthosetwopersons,
one person, he himself and accused no.1 Mahesh came back to
Alapalliandtheycametohishouseandtooksomefoodandaccused
No.1leftforbusstand.Heidentifiedcorrectlyaccusedno.2Pandu
Narote and accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki amongst the six accused
personswhowerepresentbeforethecourt.

71] Inhiscrossexaminationbythelearneddefencecounsel
headmittedthatinthemonthofAugust,2013hewasdeputedat
C.O.Office,Alapalliandon2082013policeofAheriPoliceStation
cametohimforinterrogationandhewastakeninPolicestationin
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
50 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

custodyand whenhe wasaskedtositinthePolicestation,Aheri,

P.S.I.toldhimthatSahebwouldcomeandhewouldinterrogatewith
him.HisrelativebynamePapatelephonedtoDr.Kanna abouthis
detentioninPoliceStation,AheriandhewastakeninPoliceStation
becausepolicecametoknowfrominterrogationofaccusedthathe
handed over Rs.5 lacks received from Narmadakka at Ballarsha
RailwayStation.Headmittedthatwhenon21sthewasagaincalled
inpolicestation,atthattime,accusedno.2PanduNaroteandno.1
MaheshTirkiwerenotpresentinthepolicestationandon21sthe
himselfhadgonetopolicestationAherionhisownashewastoldby
policeatthetimeofreleasinghimon20ththatheshouldcomeon
21st.

72] Hedeniedthatfrom2082013to2582013hedidnot
sign muster roll at his office i.e. C.O. Office, Alapalli of Ballarpur
PaperMillandfrom20thto25thhewasatpolicestationandhedid
notattendhisdutiesandaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2Pandu
Narotedidnotcometohimanddidnottelltheabovefactsandhe
didnotgotoBallarshaRailwayStationalongwithcashofRs.5lacs
and did not give it to the person acquainted with accused no.1
MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteasdirectedbyNarmadakka.

Confessional Statements of accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and

accusedno.2PanduNarote

73] According to prosecution after arrest of accused no.1

MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarote,theyexpressedtheirdesireto
make confessional statements before Magistrate and Investigating
Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche made application to J.M.F.C. Aheri
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
51 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas for recordingthe statement ofaccusedno.1

MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteunderSection164oftheCr.P.C.
and thereafter produced both the accused before J.M.F.C., Aheri
P.W.12Vyasforrecordingtheirstatementson4.9.2013andthereafter
J.M.F.C., Aheri P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas recorded confessional
statementsofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteafter
following due procedure of law. To prove this aspect prosecution
reliedontheevidenceof

Sr. Witness NameofWitness ExhibitNo.

No. no.
1 P.W.11 Investigating Officer Suhas 235
PrakashBawche
2 P.W.12 J.M.F.C.,AheriNileshwarVyas 277

EVIDENCE

74] InvestigatingOfficerSuhasPrakashBawche(P.W.11) was

Sub Divisional Police Officer of Aheri. He in his examination at
Exh.235 stated that on 2282013 offence was registered in Crime
no.3017/2013atAheriPoliceStationunderSections13,20&39of
UAPAandunderSection120(B)ofI.P.C.andasperdirectionsofS.P.
Gadchirolihereceivedinvestigationofthecrimeandon2382013he
tookPCRofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteandno.3
HemMishraandduringinterrogationaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiand
no.2PanduNaroteexpressedtheirwillingnesstoconfesstheirguilt,
henceon292013hehadgivenletter(Exh.242)totheJMFCAheri
(P.W.12NileshwarVyas)torecordstatementsofaccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirkiandno.2PanduNaroteunderSec.164ofCr.P.C.andon149
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
52 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

2013 he recorded statement of witness Raju Atram (P.W.9) and

thereafter he received sealed envelop from JMFC Aheri about
recordingofstatementsu/s164ofCr.P.C.

75] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythedefence. Inhis

crossexamination he admitted that he did not file say on the
applicationofretractionofconfessionbyaccusedashewasnotasked
to file the say. He admitted that DIG Ravindra Kadam had also
interrogatedtheaccusedinthepresentcaseandduringinvestigation
accusedweretakentoofficeofSuperintendentofPolice,Gadchiroli,
DIG office Gadchiroli and Naxal Cell, Gadchiroli for interrogation
purpose. He denied that confession statements of accused were
recorded by torture and influence and by threatening them and
whenevertheywerebroughttocourtandconfessionalstatementsof
boththeaccusedweregotrecordedunderthetortureandinfluence
of police and each time when they were produced before the
Magistrate, police were pressurizing them for making confessional
statements.

76] P.W.12 Nileshwar Gaurishankar Vyas, the Judicial

Magistrate,FirstClass,Aherirecordedtheconfessionalstatementsof
accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote. He in his
examinationatExh.277statedabouttheprocedurefollowedbyhim
whilerecordingtheconfessionalstatementofbothaccused,indetail.
Hestatedthataccusedno.2MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduPoraNarote
were produced before him on 2382013. Thereafter they were
remanded to MCR on 292013 and on 292013 the investigating
officer Aheri made application before him for recording the
confessionalstatementsofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2Pandu
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
53 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Naroteandhence,heinformedboththeaccusedaboutthesameand
askedthemtothinkaboutmakingofconfession. Onthatdaythey
were willing to make confession but he did not record their
statementsashewantedtogivethemreflection timetothinkover
andhe madeitknowntobothaccusedthatiftheyweretomake
confessional statements then that could be used against them and
after personal verification of both of them, they showed their
willingness about the confession of their guilt and hence, he had
given them time till 492013 and hence both the accused were
producedbeforehimon492013.

77] He stated that on 492013, both accused i.e. accused

nos.1MaheshandNo.2Panduwereproducedbythepolicebefore
himwhowerenotconnectedwithinvestigationofthiscaseat530
p.m. Accused no.2 Pandu Narote was produced at 500 p.m. and
accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki was produced on 530 p.m. by Head
ConstableAnwarQureshiB.no.1163andhehasmentionedthetime
of productionofboththeaccusedandafterproductionofaccused
no.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotehehasplacedtheminto
witnessboxonebyoneandtakenprecautionthatboththeaccused
andpolicewerenotaudibleandvisibletoeachotherandappraised
boththeaccusedthattheywerenotinpolicecustodyormagisterial
custody.Heaskedboththeaccusedonebyonewhethertheyhadany
illtreatment in police custody and whether they were induced by
policetomakeconfessionalstatementsbuttheyrepliedinnegative.

78] Hestatedthatheinformedaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiand
no.2PanduNarotethatheisaMagistrateandhehasnoconcernwith
policeandtoldbothofthemthattheywerenotinpolicecustodyand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
54 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

askedthemwhethertheyhavebeeninducedbypoliceoranyother
personsresponsiblefortheirarrest,towhichtheyrepliedinnegative.
Heaskedthemthathewantedtoexaminetheirpersonalbodyand
accusedrepliedinaffirmativeandthereafterheexaminedpersonal
bodyofboththeaccused.

79] Heputcertainquestionstoboththeaccusedonebyone
and prepared their memorandum statements separately and noted
downallthequestionsandanswersasstatedbythemandexamined
them one by one when the other accused was out of the court.
Memorandumregardingquestionsandanswersputtoaccusedno.2
Pandu Narote is at Exh.278 andmemorandumregardingquestions
andanswersputtoaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiisatExh.279.

80] He stated that first of all he had asked accused no.1

Mahesh Kariman Tirki when he was arrested by the police and
accused replied that before 15 days approximately. He asked him
whetherhewaskeptundersurveillancebypolicetowhichaccused
no.1Maheshrepliedinnegative.Heaskedaccusedno.1Maheshsince
whenhewasinthecustodyofthepoliceandaccusedrepliedthathe
was in magisterial custody at that time. He asked accused no.1
Maheshatwhatplaceshewaskeptbypolicetowhichaccusedreplied
thatatpolicestationAheri.Thereafterheaskedaccuseddidhewish
to make the confessional statement to which accused replied in
affirmative. Thenheaskedhimwhetherthereflectiontimeoftwo
days was sufficient or not. Accused replied in affirmative. He
explainedhimthathewasnotboundtomakeastatementandthere
wasnocompulsionthatheshouldmakeastatement. Heexplained
accusedthatifhemakesastatementthenitwouldberecordedandit
wouldbeusedasevidenceagainsthim.Accusedunderstoodthesame.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
55 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

81] Then he explained that even if he would not make a

confession,hewouldnotbekeptinpolicecustodyandalsoasked
whether he was given threat, promise or allurement by police for
making confessional statement to which he replied in negative.
ThereafterheaskedaccusedMaheshthatwhetherhewasmakingthe
statementvoluntarilyandwithhisfreeownwillandaccusedreplied
intheaffirmative.Heaskedaccusedno.1Maheshthatwhetherhe
hadanycomplaint,grievanceagainstanybodyandaccusedrepliedin
thenegativeandaftergettingsatisfactoryanswersfromtheaccused,
hesatisfiedthataccusedno.1Maheshwasgoingtomakestatement
voluntarilyandwithhisownfreewill. Herecordedthestatement
givenbyaccusedno.1MaheshTirki.

82] Inthesaidconfessionalstatementaccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirkistatedasunder:

a] That,sincehisbirthhehasbeenresidingatMurewada,
Tah. Etapalli, Dist. Gadchiroli. Earlierhisfatherandmotherwere
residinginChhattisgarhStateandthereaftersince2530yearsthey
startedlivingatMurewada. Inhisfamilytherearethreebrothers,
threesisters,fatherandmother.Hestudiedupto8thstandard.After
thatheengagedhimselfinagriculturework.Intheyear20072008
he along with Rajkumar was doing painting work in the Church
situated at Ballarshah and said work lasted for 3 months and
thereafter he did the painting work at Mul, Chandrapur, Virur,
Awarpurforoneyearandduringthatperiodheusedtoresideoutside
thevillage.Thereafterhereturnedtohisvillageandthereafterhegot
married. After marriage for 3 months he went to Turangal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
56 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(Karnataka)fordoingtheworkofbuildingconstruction.Thereafter
againhereturnedtohisvillageandstarteddoingagriculturework.

b] At Murewada naxalites used to come several times in

month and they used to tell one person of village to make
arrangement fortheirlunchordinner. The naxalitesusedtotake
meetinginthevillageandinthesaidmeetingnaxalitesusedtotell
villagersnottogooutsidevillageforworkandifsomebodygoesfor
work outside, he would be expelled from village, otherwise whole
familyofthatpersonwouldbebeatenandtheywouldbeexpelled
fromthevill81age. Furthertheyusedtotellthemnottocutforest
wood.Furthertheywereaskingwhetherpolicewereusedtocomein
thevillage.FurthertheywereaskingwhetherGovernmentwantedto
digminesanddirectedthevillagerstoopposeit. Amongthesaid
naxalites Narmadakka, Ramko, Bhaskar and Sinnu used to come
frequently in the village along withother several naxalites. Every
yearinJuly28naxalitesusedtocomeintheirvillageandusedtocall
4to5personsfromthevillageandusedtohavesinginganddancing
programme.

c] He further stated that he used to give meals to the

naxalitesintheforestareaandnaxalitesusedtoputpressureonhim
todoworktoldbythem. InthatyearinthemonthofMayduring
season of Tendupatta Pandu Narote met him and told that
NarmadakkahadcalledthematTodgatta.Onthenextdayatabout
3.00p.m.hehimselfandPanduwenttoTodgatta. Thereafterone
personmethimandtheytoldhimthattheycamethereastheywere
calledbynaxalites.Theywentinthedirectionshownbythatperson
and they found four naxalite persons. Those persons asked them
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
57 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

whethertheyarefromMurewada.Thereaftertheytookthembelow
the hill in the forest area, there Narmadakka was present.
Narmadakkatookthematsomedistanceandsheaskedwhetherhis
nameisMaheshandwhetherhehadseenBallarshaareaorBallarsha
RailwayStation,thenhetoldher,yes. Sheaskedhimtogoalong
withPandutoBallarshaRailwayStationon28May2013,wheretwo
persons were coming and to receive them and to bring them at
Todgatta. Shetoldhimthatforidentificationofthatpersonthese
personswouldbehavinghat,spect,bottleofwaterandnewspaper
and they should be having banana, bottle of water, Marathi
newspaper and those twopersonswouldcome tothemwouldask
theirname,thentheyshouldtelltheirnameasRaju.Thereafterthey
shouldaskhisnameandtheywouldtellhisnameasAkash.Asper
herdirectionon27May2013hehimselfalongwithPanduproceeded
forBallarshaandtheycameatAllapalliandhaltedthereinthenight.

d] Onnextdayi.e.on28May2013atabout6.00a.m.they
proceededtoBallarshahandafterreachingBallarshahtheypurchased
Marathinewspaper,bananaandbottleofwaterandthereafterthey
wentandsatinwaitinghall.InthewaitinghallofRailwayStation
atabout10.00a.m.onepersoncame,hewashavinghat,specs,bottle
ofwaterandnewspaperandheaskedhisname,theytoldhisnameas
RajuandhetoldhisnameasAkash. Outofthemonepersonwas
havingheight5to6ft.,longhairuptoshoulder,beardandmustache,
bignose,bigeyes,faircolour,bigface,wearingkurtaandpaijama
andhavingshoesinhislegs. Otherpersonwashavingshortheight
than that of first person,without havingbeardandmustache,few
hairwithsomewhitehair,faircolour,bignose,bigeyes,wellbuilt,
wearing shirt and pant and was talking in Hindu language. After
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
58 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

confirmationtheidentityofthatpersonsatabout11.00a.m.Pandu
took these two persons at Murewada as per the direction of
Narmadakka,he haltedthereasonthenextdayon29May2013
anothertwopersonswerecomingatBallarshahRailwayStationand
foridentificationofthatNarmadakkahadgiveninstructionasabove.
Hewasalsotoldthaton29.05.2013RajuAtramalsowouldcometo
Ballarshah Railway Station and he would be having Rs.5,00,000/
andheshouldhandoversaidmoneytothatpersonwhowerecoming
fromDelhi.

e] On 29.05.2013 at about 9.00 a.m. he along with Raju

AtramreachedatBallarshaRailwayStationandtheyweresittingin
thewaitingroomofRailwayStation,atabout10.00a.m.twopersons
came there and after confirmation the identity as one of the said
person asked whether he had brought material, he replied yes.
Thereafter, he took out Rs.5,00,000/ from the bag of Raju and
handedovertothatpersonandthesaidpersonstookthemoneyand
lefttheplace.HetookthatanotherpersonandhehimselfandRaju
proceededtoMurewadabybus.Thesaidpersonwashavingonebig
bag. Hestatedthedescriptionofthattwoperson,onepersonwas
havingbaghavingheight5.2ft,withouthavingbeardandmustache,
wellbuilt,wearingshirtandtalkinginHindilanguage.Otherperson
washavingheightof6to6.25ft.,faircolour,withouthavingbeardor
mustache,shorthairsonhead,bigeyes,bignose,bigface,wearing
shirtandjeanspant,wearingbootonhislegandwastalkinginHindi
language.Atabout2.00p.m.theyreachedatAllapalliandtooklunch
atthehouseofRaju,atabout3.00p.m.heproceededalongwiththat
personatEtapalliandtakenhimtoEtapalli.HestatedthatDharma
from Gardewada Tola come on motorcycle and they sat on the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
59 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

motorcycleandreachedatMurewadabetween7.00to8.00p.m.In
the village people were preparing dinner for naxalites. 5 to 6
naxalites were there and said naxalites took dinner along with
persons who accompanied withhim and after dinner the naxalites
tookthatpersonandwentinforest.

f] Mahesh further stated that on 14 August 2013

Narmadakkacametohisvillagealongwith15to20naxalitesand
RajuAtram,andthatoneofthevillagerstoldhimthatNarmadakka
hadcalledhimandPanduintheforestsituatedoutsidethevillage.
ThereaftertheywentoutsidethevillageandwhereNarmadakkawas
presentalongwitharmednaxalites.Narmadakkatoldthemthaton
20/22August2013twopersonswerecomingtoBallarshahRailway
Stationandtheywouldcomeeitherat10.00a.m.or2.00p.m.and
sheaskedtotakethesepeopleatvillageLendarandhaltatthehouse
ofKomatiBabusituatedatvillageLendarandNarmadakkahadgiven
onechitforhandingovertosaidpersonswhichwouldbeusedfor
identification purpose. Furtheridentification purposeshe toldhim
thattheywouldbehavingMarathinewspaper,umbrella,bananaand
thosepersonswouldasktheirname,andtheyshouldtelltheirname
asRajuandthosepersonswouldtelltheirnameasShankar.

g] Inthemorningatabout9.00a.m.theywenttoBallarshah
RailwayStation. Theypurchasedonepaper,banana,umbrellaand
thereafterwenttoRailwayStation,stayedinthewaitingroom. At
about9.45a.m.personwiththesamedescriptioncamethereandhe
stayedatsomedistancefromthemandthereafterhecametothem
andaskedhisname,hetoldnameasRajuandtheyaskedtheirname,
hetoldhisnameasShankar.Astheyaskedaboutsecondperson,who
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
60 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

hadcomealongwithhim,hetoldthathecouldnotcome.Thereafter
theytookthatpersontoAheribyS.T.busandtheyweretalking,by
thattimepolicearrestedthem.

83] He stated that after recordingthe statement of accused

no.1 Mahesh he took his signatures on each page of confessional
statement and put his signature below the statement and given
Certificateno.IinhisownhandwritingasperCriminalManualand
thereafter,wroteCertificateno.IIinhisownhandwritingexplaining
totheaccusedno.1Maheshthatheisnotboundtomakeconfession
andifhedoesso,anyconfession,itmightbeusedasevidenceagainst
him. The confessio81n was voluntarily made. The said confession
wasreadoverandexplainedtotheaccusedandheadmitteditas
correctanditcontainsafullandtrueaccountofstatementsmadeby
him. Hehadgivencertificateno.IIIinhisownhandwritingonthe
pointthatHowhesatisfiedthattheconfessionwasgenuine.

84] He had given the statement that he has certified the

groundsabouthissatisfactionthataccusedwasmakingtheconfession
voluntarilywithoutanyallurementorinducementbypoliceandsame
are noted in his certificate. He stated the grounds on which he
believedthatconfessionwasgenuinewas

i] the accused was appearing to be familiar with the court

whilerecordingentireconfession.
ii] Accused 81 was without fear, and no favour either to
prosecutionortheotheraccused.
iii]Accusedneverhesitated.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
61 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

85] Furtherhehastakenthefollowingprecautiontoremove
theaccusedfromtheinfluenceofpoliceasfollows:
i] He told accused that he is independent person not at all
concernedwithpolice.
ii]Hetoldaccusedthatheissupposedtorecordhisconfession
onlyifaccusedmakesvoluntarily.
iii]Hetoldaccusedthatheisnotboundtomakeconfessionand
ifherefusetomakehewillnotbesenttopolicecustody.
Hehadgiventheaccusedtwodaystimeforreflectionbefore
recording the confession.Thereafter he signed the certificates.The
confessionofaccusedisatExh.280andhisCertificateI,IIandIIIare
markedatExh.281,282and283.

86] He stated thaton892013atabout330p.m.accused

no.2PanduPoraNarotewasproducedbeforehimforrecordinghis
statementandwhenaccusedno.2Panduwasproducedbeforehim,
henoticedthattherewerenopolicemeninthecourtorinanyplace
andthereafterheaskedsomequestionstotheaccusedasfollowsand
herepliedthemaccordingly.

87] He stated that first of all he had asked accused no.2

PanduPoraNarotewhenhewasarrestedbythepoliceandaccused
repliedthatbefore18daysapproximately. Heaskedhimaboutthe
placeofarrestand accusedno.2Pandu repliedthatnearbusstand
Aheri. He asked him whether he was kept under surveillance by
police to which accused no.2 Pandu replied in negative. He asked
accusedno.2Pandusincewhenhewasinthecustodyofthepolice
andaccusedrepliedthathewasinmagisterialcustodyatthattime.
Heaskedaccusedno.2Panduatwhatplaceshewaskeptbypoliceto
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
62 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

which accused replied that at police station Aheri. He obtained

consentofaccusedno.2Pandutoexaminehisperson.Thereafterhe
examined accused. There were no external injuries found on the
personofaccused.Thereafterheaskedhim,didhewishtomakethe
statement.Accusedrepliedinaffirmative.Thenheaskedhimwhether
thereflectiontimeoftwodayswassufficientornot.Accusedreplied
inaffirmative.Heexplainedhimthathewasnotboundtomakea
statement and there was no compulsion that he should make a
statement. Accused answered in affirmative and understood the
same. He explained accused that if he make a statement then it
would be recorded and it wouldbe usedasevidence againsthim.
Accused understood the same. Then he explained that even if he
wouldnotmakeaconfession,hewouldnotbekeptinpolicecustody.
Heunderstoodthesameandrepliedaccordingly.Hethenaskedhim,
hadthepoliceoranyotherpersonthreatenedhim.Accusedrepliedin
negative.Heaskedhimhadthepoliceoranyotherpersonpromised
himthatlesserpunishmentwouldbegivenorhewouldbeacquitted,
ifhemakessuchstatement. Accusedrepliedinnegative. Thenhe
askedhim,hadthepoliceoranyotherpersonpromisedhimthatifhe
would make such statement, he would be made as a witness for
prosecution. Accused replied in negative. Thereafter without
administeringtheoathtoaccused,herecordedstatementofaccused
PanduNaroteasstatedbyhim.HisstatementisatExh.286.

88] Intheconfessionalstatementaccusedno.2PanduNarote
statedasunder:

a] Since last 20 years he was residing at Murrewada,

Tah.Etapalli,District:Gadchiroli. Naxlitesusedtocomefor2to3
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
63 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

timesinthemonthinhisvillageandthevillagersandhehimselfused
to provide required articles to them. Amongst the said naxlites
Bhaskar, Ramko, Manoj and Narmadakka were there. Before two
yearsnaxaliteBhaskarcameinhisvillageandBhaskartoldhimto
bringRadio,Torch,Polythenebagfrommarketandhehandedover
Rs.1,500/tohimandhepurchasedthearticlesfromtheshopand
handedovertohim,atthattime,alongwithBhaskar10to15naxlites
werethere.Beforetwomonthsofrecordingofhisstatementu/s164
Cr.P.C.,onepersonfromvillageKorgattacameinhisvillageandtold
him that he and Mahesh were called by Narmadakka at Korgatta.
Accordingly,hehimselfandMaheshwenttoKorgattaatabout400
p.m.,whereoneoldpersonmetthemandhetookhimintheforest
outsideofvillage.

b] Thereafter they saw Narmadakka and other 15 to 20

naxlitesarmedwithguns.Atthattime,Narmadakkatoldhimthaton
28May,2013,twopersonswerecomingfromDelhitoBallarshahby
Railway and she asked them to go to receive them. Narmadakka
askedthemtogotoBallarshahRailwayStationandwaitforthemin
waitingroom.Shefurthertoldthatinordertoidentifythembythose
twopeopletheyhavetokeepBannana,waterbottleandnewspaper
and the same article would be with the said person i.e. the said
personwouldbehavingarticlelikehat,spectandpaperandthese
person would come to them and they would ask their names and
thereaftertheyshouldtelltheirnameasRaju.Thereaftertheywere
directedtoasknameofthesepersonsandtheyweretotellhisname
asAkashandhewasaskedtotakethesepeopleatMurrewadaand
Maheshwastohaltthere asonthenextdaytwoanotherpersons
weretocomefromDelhiandMaheshhastohandoverRs.5,00,000/
throughRajuAtram,residenceofAlapalli.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
64 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

c] On 27.05.2013 he and Mahesh proceeded to Ballarsha

andinthatnighttheyhaltedinthehouseofRajuAtramandonnext
daytheyproceededtoBallarshaatabout900a.m. AttheRailway
Station, they purchased Banana, water bottle and news paper and
thereafterwentinthewaitingroomofthesaidRailwayStation.At
about 1000 a.m. two persons came there as described by
Narmadakkaandonepersonwashavingbighairuptohisshoulder,
beard , big face, fair colour, big nose, big eyes, well built, having
height5.5ft.andhewastalkinginHindiandhewaswearingKurta
andpantandhavingshoesinhislegs. Secondpersonwasoffair
colour,withouthavingbeardandmustache,fewhair,bignose,big
eyes,wellbuiltandfattyandhavingheightmorethan5.5ft.,wearing
shoesinhislegsandhewastalkinginHindi.Afterconfirmationof
acquaintancehestartedwiththembybusandwenttoMurewadain
hishouseatabout4a.m.Inthenight4naxalscametohishouseand
theyaskedhimwhethertwopersonscamefromDelhi,herepliedin
affirmative. Thereafter these 4naxalitestookthese two people in
forestarea. Onthenextdayheremainedinhishouseandonthat
dayMaheshTirkicametohishousealongwithonepersonwhocame
fromDelhibetween7.00to8.00p.m.andfromMaheshTirkihecame
toknowthathehandedoverRs.5,00,000/.

d] One person whocame fromDelhiwasbroughtbyRaju

Atramandthereafterthatpersonwentback. Thepersonwhowas
broughtbyMaheshTirkiathishousewashavingdescriptionwasfair
colour,slim,shorthairandhewaswearingshirt,pantandshoesand
beforearrivalofMaheshTirkiofthatpersons,naxaliteshadcometo
hishousetotakethatpersonandsaidnaxalitepersontoldvillagersto
preparefoodforthem.Thereafterthesaidnaxalitesandthatperson
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
65 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

tookdinnerinthevillage.Furtherthenaxalitesalsotoldthevillagers
tosenddinnerintheforestareaforothernaxalitesandthereafter
theylefttheplace.

e] After 5 to 6 days in between 6.00 to 7.00 p.m. some

naxalites along with two persons which he had brought from
BallarshaRailwayStation,cametohishouseandaskedhimtotake
thattwopersontoAllapalliandthereafterreturnedtohishouse.

f] On14/15August,2013MaheshTirkicametohishouse
andtoldhimthathewascalledbyNarmadakkaandthereafterhe
took him to agricultural land near the village where Narmadakka
alongwith17to18naxaliteswerepresentthereandNarmadakka
toldhimthaton20or22Augusttwopersonsweretocomefrom
Delhi to Ballarsha Railway Station and they were asked to go to
receivethesepeopleandshetoldthatsaidpersonhavingspecscover,
hat on the head and newspaper in their hand and for their
identificationtheyshouldhavebanana,newspaperandumbrellawith
themandthosepersonswouldtelltheirnameasShankarandthey
shouldtelltheirnameasRaju. On20/22August2013inbetween
9.00to10.00a.m.healongwithMaheshwenttoBallarshaandthey
werehavingumbrellaintheirhandandtheypurchasedbananaand
newspaper and they were sitting in the waiting room at Ballarsha
RailwayStation.Atabout10.00a.m.onepersoncametherehaving
hatinhishead,paperandspecscoverinhishand. Hewashaving
oneblackcolourbagandheaskedtheirname,theytoldtheirnameas
RajuandthereafterhetoldhisnameasShankarandtheyconfirmed
hisidentity.ThereaftertheytookthatpersonandstartedtoAheriin
S.T.bus. Theyreachedthereandnearbusstandtheyweretalking
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
66 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

witheachotherandatthattimepolicearrestedthemandtookthem
to Police Station. He stated that naxalites used to pressure them,
assaultthemandtheyusedtodoworkforthem.

89] J.M.F.C.NileshwarVyas(P.W.12)statedthatatthefootof
statementhehadgiventhreecertificatesinhisownhandwriting.In
Certificate I, he certified that the confession was recorded in his
presenceandhearingandtherecordcontainsafullandtrueaccount
ofstatementmadebyaccused.InCertificateII,hehaswrittenthathe
explainedtotheaccusedPanduPoraNarotethathewasnotboundto
makeconfessionandthatifhewoulddosoanyconfessionmadeby
himmightbeusedasevidenceagainsthim.Insaidcertificatehehad
also written that he had the belief that the confession was
voluntarilymade. Thenhereadover totheaccusedthestatement
recordedbyhim,accusedunderstoodthesame.Thereafterheaffixed
hissignaturesbelowCertificateI&II. Certificateno.IIIareinhis
ownhandwriting. Inthesecertificateshehasmentionedthereason
astowhyhehadformedtheopinionthattheconfessionwasgenuine.
Hestatedthegroundsonwhichheformedbeliefthatthestatement
wasgenuine.Theyareasunder:

i]theaccusedwastalkingwithouthesitationthroughoutthe
statement.
ii]theaccusedwastalkingimpartially.
iii]theaccusedwasfamiliarwiththecourt.

90] Hehadtakenfollowingprecautionstoremovetheaccused
fromtheinfluenceofthepolice.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
67 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

i]Hetoldthataccusedwasnotboundatalltomakeconfession
andhewouldnotbesenttopolicecustodyatthebehestofrefusingto
makeit.
ii]Theaccusedandpolicewerenotvisibleoraudibletoeach
otherandheexplainedtotheaccusedaboutthesame.
iii]Hetoldhimthataccusedwasanindependentpersonnotat
allconcernwiththepolice.
iv]Hehadgivenhimreflectiontimefor2daysbeforerecording
confession.

91] Hestatedthathehadgivenhimreflectiontimefortwo
daysonrecord,butactuallytheaccusedhadgotfourdaysreflection
time. Thereafter he affixed signature below the certificates and
remanded the accused to judicial custody. The Certificate I is at
Exh.287. CertificateII is at Exh.288. Certificate III is marked at
Exh.289.

92] Afterrecordingthesameitwasreadovertotheaccused
no.2Pandu Narote andhe admittedthe same tobe correct andit
containsafullandtrueaccountofthestatementmadebyhim. He
further stated that after recording the statements of accused no.1
Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote, he has kept it in sealed
envelop withthecustodyofNazirofcourttobe filedalongwith
chargesheetandanothercopyofthestatementinsealedcondition
wasgiventoinvestigatingofficer.

93] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythedefencecounsel.
Inhiscrossexaminationheadmittedthatgivinganinducementor
threatbypoliceofficerisamisconductandalsoabuseofanauthority
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
68 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

asapoliceofficer.Noneoftheaccusedhadmadeapplicationbefore
himabouttheilltreatmentbythepoliceduringinvestigationandin
thepresentcaseaccusedmadewrittenapplicationbeforehimabout
theilltreatmentmetedoutbythemafterrecordingtheirstatement
and he had not taken any action on the basis of their written
application.Hedidnotcallanyreportfrompoliceofficerbecausehe
came to know that said confession was voluntarily made and
applicationforilltreatmentwasmadesubsequently.Headmittedthat
the threatening and intimidation is a criminal offence and it also
amounts to interference and when there is a complaint disclosing
commission of cognizable office, then the Magistrate has to take
cognizanceoftheoffenceandinordertoassisttheinvestigation,he
didnottakecognizanceofoffenceinrespectofallegationsmadeat
Exh.292.Headmittedthaton1592013accusedmadecomplaintfor
removing the handcuff as they were produced before him in
handcuffedconditionandhepassedtheorderonthesaidapplication
thatunlesstheaccusedbecomesviolentandtherearepossibilitiesof
escapingfromthecourtofjusticeheshouldnotbehandcuffedand
accusedwereAdiwasisandfromarrestformshecametoknowthat
theybelongingtoMadiyaandGondcommunity.

94] Incrossexamination,hedeniedthatasthesaidconfession
wasrecordedundertheinducementandthreatofpolice,hedidnot
callthesayofpolice.Hedeniedthatpolicehadplacedbeforehim
the confessional statement made by accused before police before
recording of confessional statementsbyhimandaccusedwere not
knowinghislanguageandhewasnotknowingtheirlanguageandhe
didnotrecordanyconfessionalstatementsand policehadalready
preparedthesameandhesignedthereon. Hedeniedthataccused
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
69 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

were not conversant with the language in which statements were

recordedandaccusedwerenotabletotalkinMarathiandtheywere
not knowing Hindi and none of the accused made confessional
statementbeforehimandhehadrecordedthesameattheinstanceof
policetoassisttheprosecution.

ArgumentofSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathanonthepointofarrestand
seizureinrespectofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2Pandu
Naroteandno.3HemMishra

95] LearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathansubmittedthataccused
no.1MaheshTirki, no.2PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishrawere
arrested at secluded place near Aheri bus stand and accused no.1
Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote were knowing accused no.3
Hem Mishra and they were sent by absconding naxal accused
Narmadakkatotakeaccusedno.3HemMishratomeetherandthis
factwascorroboratedbytheevidenceofP.W.9RajuPoriyaAtramwho
inhisexaminationstatedthataccusedno.2PanduNarotetookhimto
NarmadakkaandthereafterNarmadakkahandedoverhimRs.5Lacs
inthepacketandon2952013hereachedBallarshaRailwayStation
at1000a.m.andthereaftertwounknownpersonscamethereand
accused no.2 Pandu went to them and discussed with them and
thereafteraccusedno.2Pundutookthemoneypacketfromhimand
gavetoonepersonoutofthem.

96] Hesubmittedthatitisthedefenceofaccusedno.2Pandu
thatnothingwasseizedfromhispossession,however,thisdefenceof
accusedno.2PanduNaroteisfalseasinpersonalsearchofaccused
no.2PanduNarotehispersonaldocumentsi.e.SBIpassbook,birth
certificateandbirthcertificateofhisdaughter,bonafidecertificateof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
70 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

hisdaughterandhehimself,castecertificate,domicilecertificate,pan
card, his election identity card, registration certificate of vehicle
bearing No.MH33/K9656 were found and further from his
possession incriminating articles i.e. Platform ticket of Ballarsha
Railway station, Lokmat Marathi newspaper, umbrella were seized.
Hesubmittedthatthearticlesi.e.Lokmatnewspaperandumbrella
arethecommonarticlesbuttheseareusedbythemembersofRDF,a
frontalorganisationofbannedCPI(Maoist)organisationtorecognize
theirpersonsandthisfactisclearfromthedocumentatpageno.90of
Exh.267titledas,IamconvincedtheNaxalites(Maoists)havealot
ofsupportwhichisretrievedfromtheharddisk(Exh.4)seizedfrom
thehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaunderseizurepanchanama
(Exh.165). He further submitted that finding of Railway platform
ticket of Ballarsha Railwaystation dated 28.5.2013 with accused
no.2PandushowsthathehadbeentoBallarshaRailwaystationon
28.5.2013andfromtheevidenceofP.W.9RajuAtramitisestablished
thaton27thofthatmonthaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Panduhad
beentohimtoAlapalliandtheytoldhimthathewascalledbynaxal
Narmadakka.

97] Withrespecttoaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,hesubmitted
that from the personal search of accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki three
pamphletsofnaxalswereseizedandthisfactisrevealedfromthe
evidenceofPIAnilBadgujar(P.W.10)andthesameiscorroboratedby
the evidence of panch witness P.W.1 Santosh Bawne and these
pamphletsareatArticleNos.139,140and141.

i] Art.139 is a pamphlet issued by Bhakapa (Maowadi),

(GadchiroliDivision)makingallegationsagainstthedecisionofthe
GovernmenttodestroythelifeofAadiwasis.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
71 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ii] Art.140 is a pamphlet issued by Bhumkal Johar Te

DandakaryanyaSpecialZonalCommittee,Bhakapa(Maowadi),titled
as,AmarShahidirkuLalSalam

iii] Art.141 is a pamphlet issued by Bhartachi Communist

Party(Maowadi),MaharashtraRajyaSamitititledas ^jk[k lkaHkkGqu
Bsok jk[k >kysY;kaph] laiyh ukgh y<kbZ vtqu [kSjykathph* andatthe
enditismentionedthat ^[kSjykath gR;kdkaMkP;k lq=/kkjkauk ikBh'kh
?kky.kkjs] iksfylka}kjs nfyrkaP;k gR;k dj.kkjs] nfyrkar ng'kr iljfo.kkjs
egkjkV 'kklu eqnkZckn !-- uotuoknh dzkafr f>ankckn*

98] He submitted that Navjanvadi Kranti Jindabad is a

sloganusedinmanyvideosofRDFconferencefoundinharddisks,
CDs, DVDs, pendrives which were seized from house search of
accusedno.6Saibabawhichshowsthatheisalsoactivememberof
RDF,afrontalorganizationofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist).

99] He submitted that further finding of xerox copy of his

electionIDcard(Art.19)fromthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.1
MaheshTirkishowsthatpersonalsearchofaccusedno.1Maheshwas
taken and incriminating articles were found with him. Hence, he
submitted that prosecution has proved that accused no.1 Mahesh
Tirkiandno.2PanduNarotewerearrestedalongwithaccusedno.3
HemMishraon22.8.2013atAheriBusStandandpersonalsearchof
accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote was taken and
from their possession their personal and incriminating documents
relatingtoCPI(Maoist)wereseized.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
72 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

100] In respect of accused no.3 Hem Mishra, Spl. P.P. Shri

Sathainathansubmittedthataftertakingpersonalsearchofaccused
no.3 Hem Mishra, cash amount of Rs.7,700/, Railwayticket from
DelhitoBallarshadated19.8.2013,16GBmemorycardofscandisc
company, ATM card of SBI, his pan card, election identity card,
membershipcardofJawaharlalNehruUniversity,Delhi,Identitycard,
Yatricard,cameraofKodakcompanywithchargerandsackinwhich
clothes, cover of spect, white cap, newspaper of Rashtriya Sahara
publicationofNewDelhidated19thAugust,2013werefound. He
submittedthatfindingofthecap,casecoverofspect,newspaperat
Article Nos.21 to 30 in possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra,
clearly shows that these things are used by naxal people as
identificationcodetorecognizetheiridentityandthisfactisalsoclear
fromdocumentatpageno.90ofExh.267filedonrecord. Further,
finding of personal identification documents i.e. election identity
card, membership card of Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi, PAN
card,bankATMcardshowsthatthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.3
Hem Mishra was conducted and the defence of the accused that
nothingwasseizedfromhispossessionisafterthought.

101] Hefurthersubmittedthatbothaccusedno.1Maheshand
no.2Panduintheirconfessionalstatementstatedthattheyalongwith
accusedno.3HemMishracametoAheriandtheywerearrestedby
police. Thisshowsthataccusedno.3HemMishrawasarrestedat
Aheribusstandandhencedefenceoftheaccusedno.3HemMishra
thathewasarrestedon20082013atBallarshaRailwaystationis
totally falsified and nothing has been brought on record from the
crossexaminationofP.W.1SantoshBawne,P.W.2JagatBhole,P.W.5
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
73 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

RavindraKumbhare,P.W.6AtulAvhad,P.W.7ApekshaRamteke,P.W.9
Anil Badgujar, P.W.11 Suhas Bawche, P.W.15 Narendra Dube and
P.W.21BhaveshNikamtodisbelievetheirevidence.

ArgumentofAdvocateShriGadlingonthepointofarrestand
seizureinrespectofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2Pandu
Naroteandno.3HemMishra

102] Per contra, the learned Advocate Shri Gadling for the
accused submitted that the prosecution case is that accused no.1
MaheshTirki,accusedno.2PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishrawere
arrested at Aheri Bus Stand on 22.8.2013 at about 6.00 p.m.
However,accordingtodefenceaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,accused
no.2PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishrawerearrestedon20.8.2013
atBallarshaRailwaystation.Tosubstantiatethesaidcontentionthe
defencehasreliedonfollowingcircumstances:

i] P.W.1SantoshBawneinhisexaminationstatedthatpolice
took personal search of accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki, accused no.2
Pandu Narote and no.3 Hem Mishra and from the possession of
accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandaccusedno.2PanduNarotepolice
seizedmobilephoneswithSIMcardsandInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11
SuhasBawche inhiscrossexaminationalsoadmittedthathehad
taken out the mobile SIM card of mobile handsets seized from
accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteandheappliedfor
the CDR and SDR of the same and received the same but the
prosecutionhasnotfiledonrecordCDRandSDRofthemobileSIM
cardofmobilehandsetsseizedfromaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
74 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

no.2PanduNaroteinspiteoftheapplicationfiledbythedefenceat
Exh.237forgettingthoseCDRandSDR.HadthesaidCDRandSDR
of the SIM of the SIM cards of mobile handsets of accused no.1
Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote filed on record by the
prosecution, from the said CDR and SDR the defence would have
beenabletosubstantiatethecaseofthedefencethataccusedno.1
MaheshTirki and no.2PanduNarotewere arrestedfromBallarsha
Railwaystationon20.8.2013henceadverseinferencecanbedrawn
againsttheprosecutionfornonproductionofCDRandSDRofmobile
SIMcardsof accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarote.In
supportofhissubmissionheplacedrelianceonthejudgmentincase
ofTomasoBrunovs.StateofU.P.reportedin2015(1)Crimes105
(SC),whereinitisheldthat

(b) Criminal trial Circumstantial evidence

NonproductionofCCTVfootage,noncollectionof
call record (details) and SIM details of mobile
phonesseizedfromtheaccusedNotmerefaulty
investigation Amounts to withholding of best
evidence Section 114(g) Indian Evidence Act,
1972 Adverse inference may be drawn against
prosecutionfornotproducingtheaforesaiddetails
particularly CCTV footage while it could
Prosecutionneitherexaminingthedoctordeclaring
the deceased 'brought dead' nor producing the
reportthatwaspreparedintheemergencywardof
thehospitalNotproducingdeathintimationsent
tothepolice.(Para27,29,30)

ii] Panch witness P.W.1 Santosh Bawne in his cross

examinationadmittedthatinJuly2014hehadbeentoAheriP.S.for
onepanchanamaandhedoesrememberthenameofaccusedinthat
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
75 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

caseandforwhatpurposehehadbeentoAheriPoliceStationinJuly,
2014butthiswitnesshadstatedtheincidentwhichoccurredinthe
year2013withexactdateandtimeandnameofaccusedpersons.
Thisversionisutterlyfalseandcannotbebelieved.

iii] Accordingtotheprosecutioninthepossessionofaccused
no.3 Hem Mishra Railway ticket from Delhi to Ballarsha dated
19.8.2013andnewspaperSaharadated19.8.2013werefoundand
accused no.2 Pandu Narote was found in possession of Lokmat
newspaperdated20.8.2013.Thisitselfshowsthataccusedno.3Hem
Mishraalongwithaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarote
werearrestedonBallarshaRailwaystationon20.8.2013andnoton
22.8.2013 at Aheri Bus Stand as alleged by the prosecution.
According to the prosecution from the personal search of accused
no.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteplatformticketofBallarsha
Railwaystation dated 28.5.2013 was found. It is the case of the
prosecutionthaton22.8.2013accusednos.1to3werearrestedat
AheriBusstandandaccusedcametherefromBallarshabyS.T.bus
but they could not find bus ticket from Ballarsha to Aheri with
accused persons, however, they found platform ticket of Ballarsha
Railwaystationdated28.5.2013.Thisstoryisnotworthtoberelied
on.

iv] He submitted that P.W.1 Santosh Bawne in his cross

examination admitted that he had no personal knowledge about
digital storage media and doesnot knowdifference between card
reader,bluetooth,pendriveandmemorycardandhecannotidentify
theuniqueidentitystoragecapacityofthedifferentelectronicmedia
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
76 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

appliancesbut in his examinationP.W.1SantoshBawnestatedthat

from the possession of accused No.3 Hem Mishra, 16 GB memory
cardwasseized.Thisshowsthatheisatutoredwitness.

v] He submitted that according to the prosecution offence

wasregisteredagainstaccusedNo.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNarote
andno.3HemMishraat930p.m.on22082013andpanchanama
Exh.137wascompletedbefore755p.m.,buttheF.I.R.numberwas
appearing in panchanama Exh.137 that is before registration of
offence.Hesubmittedthatontheseizedarticlesthelabelsbearing
crimenumberisappearing.Thisshowsthatpanchanama(Exh.137)
waspreparedafterdrawingofFIRandpanchwitnesswasnotpresent
atthetimeofdrawingpanchanamaatabout6.00p.m.asallegedby
theprosecution.

vi] He submitted that P.W.1 Santosh Bawne in his cross

examination admitted that near Aheri Bus Stand, there is road on
bothsidesandtherearepanstalls,teastallsandhotelsnearAheri
Bus Stand but inspite of this fact prosecution has not examined
independent witnesses and chosen P.W.1 Santosh Bawne who is a
stockwitnesstoactaspanchaspanchP.W.1SantoshBawneinhis
examinationstatedthatheactedasapanchfortwotimesandheis
homeguardinAheriPoliceStationsincelastthreeyearsandhence
hewasactingunderthethumbofpolice.

vii] He further submitted that P.W.1 Santosh Bawne panch

witness in his examination stated that another panch Umaji was
presentatthetimeofpanchanamabutinthepresentcaseonperusal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
77 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

of panchanama Exh.137 it is clear that the another panch was

NarendraAadkujiYempalwarandnotUmaji. ThisshowsthatP.W.1
SantoshBawnewasnotpresentatthetimeofdrawingpanchanama
Exh.137.

viii] It isthedefenceoftheaccusedthat accusedno.1

Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote were arrested at Ballarsha
Railwaystation and not at Aheri bus stand. According to their
defence on 21.8.2013 accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu
Narote were not present in Aheri Police Station and police falsely
implicated them in this case. In this respect the learned defence
AdvocateShriGadlingsubmittedthataccordingtoprosecutionfrom
the interrogation with accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu
Narotepolicecametoknowthataccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2
PanduNarotehandedoveramountofRs.5lakhsthroughP.W.9Raju
PoriyaAramtothememberofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)and
its frontal organisation RDF at Ballarsha Railwaystation at the
instance ofladynaxalNarmadakka. He submittedthat P.W.9Raju
Atraminhiscrossexaminationadmittedthatwhenhewascalledat
AheriPoliceStationon21stAugust2013,accusedno.1MaheshTirki
andno.2PanduNarotewerenotpresentinPoliceStation,Aheriand
the arrest panchanamasofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2Pandu
Narote and no.3 Hem Mishra were alleged to be effected on
22.8.2013.Itwasargued,thisshowsthataccusedno.1MaheshTirki
andno.2PanduNarotewerearrestedonearlierdateandfalsearrest
panchanamaswerepreparedshowingthataccusedno.1MaheshTirki,
no.2PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishrawerearrestedon22.8.2013.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
78 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ix] Onthepointofseizureof16GBmemorycardallegedly
seizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishrahesubmitted
thatfromtheevidenceofP.W.4ShrikantGaddewaritshowsthatsaid
memory card was opened by investigating officer P.W.11 Suhas
Bawche on 22.8.2013 in his presence. This shows that it was
tamperedbytheprosecutionandhencenovaluecanbeattachedto
thereportofCFSLMumbaiExh.266.

103] HesubmittedthataccordingtoP.W.1SantoshBawneand
no.6AtulAvhad,P.W.10AnilBadgujarwerepresentatAheriPolice
Stationon22.8.2013,however,onthatdayP.W.10AnilBadgujarwas
notpresentattheAheriPoliceStationthoughhehimselfallegedtobe
presentatpolicestation. HeinvitedattentionoftheCourtonpara
no.7 of crossexamination of P.W.10 Anil Badgujar on this point in
which he admitted that the panchanama of personal search of
accusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishra
show that it was made by different police officers. However, on
perusal of panchanama (Exh.227 to 229) in respect of arrest of
accusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishra
bearthedate23.8.2013belowhissignature.Thisshowsthathewas
not present on 22.8.2013 at Aheri Police Station and he put his
signature on 23.8.2013. The explanation given by him that by
mistakethedate23.8.2013waswrittenbelowhissignaturebutthis
explanation cannot be acceptedasit isnot possible that the same
mistakewouldoccurforthreetimes. Hence,hisexplanationisnot
worthtobereliedupon.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
79 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

104] He submitted that in para 7 of Exh.226 of cross

examinationP.W.10AnilBadgujaradmittedthathewastheincharge
ofPoliceStation,Aheritill25.8.2013andentireinvestigationofthis
case was donebyhimtill25.8.2013andfurtherinvestigationwas
handed over to P.W.11 Suhas Bawche. Not only this, this witness
statedthathecametoknowthat16GBmemorycardwasprotected
bypasswordonlywhenitwassenttoCFSLand16GBmemorycard
senttoCFSLon25.8.2013,thatmeanstill25.8.2013thiswitnesswas
notknowingthatthe16GBmemorycardwaspasswordprotected.In
PCRdated23.8.2013inparano.2itismentionedthatsomefilesin
16GBmemorycardwerepasswordprotected.Itseemsthatmemory
cardwasopenedbeforesendingittoCFSL.Henceadverseinference
canbedrawnthatpolicemanipulatedorplanted16GBmemorycard.
Oncethememorycardwasplayedonthecomputertheimportanceof
CFSLreporthasbecomevalueless.

105] He submitted that P.W.5 Ravindra Kumbhare in his

examination at Exh.210 has stated that on 31.8.2013 he came to
PoliceStation,Aherialongwithmirrorimagesof16GBmemorycard,
however,inthecrossexaminationhestatedthathecametoAheri
PoliceStationon1.9.2013. Hesubmittedthat16GBmemorycard
wasdepositedbyP.W.5RavindraKumbhareon1.9.2013andP.W.11
SuhasBawchestatedinhisexaminationatparano.4ofExh.235that
afteropeningthe16GBmemorycardtheycopiedthefilethatiswhy
panchanama in respect of 16 GB memorycard was prepared on
31.8.2013.Hearguedthatthisshowsthatallfilesin16GBMemory
Cardaretampered.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
80 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

106] He submitted that P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in his

examinationatExh.235statedthatasperoraldirectionsofthethen
SuperintendentofPolice,Gadchirolihereceivedinvestigationinthis
crimeon23.8.2013andthisoraltestimonyofP.W.11SuhasBawcheis
contradictory to the testimony of P.W.10 Anil Badgujar who in his
crossexaminationadmittedthathewasinchargeofinvestigationof
thiscrimetill25.8.2013butletterofSuperintendentofPolicedated
25.8.2013Exh.238showsthatP.W.11SuhasBawchewasdirectedto
investigatethiscrimeon25.8.2013andasperP.W.11SuhasBawche
hereceivedinvestigationon23.8.2013. Hence,testimonyofP.W.11
SuhasBawcheisnotbelievable.

Conclusiononthepointofarrestandseizureinrespectof
accusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteandno.3Hem
Mishra

107] Maindefenceoftheaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,accused
no.2 Pandu Narote and no.3 Hem Mishra were arrested from
Ballarsha railwaystation on 20.8.2013 and not on 22.8.2013 as
alleged by the prosecution and nothing was seized from their
possessionandeverythingwasplanted.Onthispoint,firstly,defence
hasdrawnattentionoftheCourttothetestimonyofpanchwitness
P.W.1 Santosh Bawne. Accordingtodefence thiswitnessisHome
GuardatAheriPoliceStationsincelastthreeyears,hence,heisacting
underthethumbofpolice.Further,thiswitnessisatutoredwitness
andheisnotrememberingtheincidentoccurredinJuly2014buthe
isexactlystatedthedateofpanchanama,nameoftheaccused,when
hehadbeentoAheriPoliceStationintheyear2013. Further,this
witnessinhiscrossexaminationadmittedthat therearepanstalls,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
81 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

tea stalls and hotels near Aheri Bus Stand but inspite of this fact
prosecution has not examined independent witnesses and chosen
P.W.1SantoshBawnewhoisastockwitnesstoactaspanchaspanch
P.W.1 Santosh Bawne in his examination stated that he acted as a
panchfortwotimes. Further,thiswitnessinhiscrossexamination
admittedthathehadnopersonalknowledgeaboutthedigitalstorage
mediaanddoesnotknowdifferencebetweencardride,bluetooth,
pendrive and memory card and he cannot identify the unique
identitystoragecapacityofthedifferentelectronicmediaappliances
but in his examination P.W.1 Santosh Bawne stated that from the
possession of accused No.3 Hem Mishra, 16 GB memory card was
seized.Thisshowsthatheisatutoredwitness.

108] It is well settled that merely because independent

witnessesthoughavailablenotchosenandexaminedisnotaground
todisbelievetheevidenceofstockwitnessasP.W.1SantoshBawnein
hiscrossexaminationadmittedthathehasactedasapanchfor2to3
times.Atthisjuncture,itisnecessarytoconsiderratiolaiddownby
the Bombay High Court in Criminal Appeal No.742 of 1988,
decidedon3.12.2001inthecaseofChandbiw/oMustaqShaikh
vs.StateofMaharashtra,inwhichitisobservedthat

B.EvidenceAct,1872,Section3Criminaltrial
AppreciationofevidenceHabitualpanchHehad
actedasapanchin3/4casesActingaspanchin
two earlier cases, would not amount to acting as
professional panch or habitual panch of police
Since he could not termed as habitual witness of
policenorcouldbetermedasprofessionalpanch.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
82 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

109] Further,theApexCourtincaseofGianChandandothers
.v.StateofHaryana reportedin (2013)14SupremeCourtCases
420 observed that nonexamination of independent witness is not
fataltotheprosecutioncaseifcaseisprovedotherwiseanditwas
furtherobservedthatevidenceofpoliceofficercanbereliedifitis
foundtobereliableanddoesnotsufferfrominfirmities.

110] Itiswellsettledthatminorcontradictionsandomissions
cannotgototherootofthecase.Eventheprosecutionwitnessmakes
falsestatementonparticularpartbutthestatementonotherpartis
reliablethenhecanbebelievedonthatotherpartandconvictioncan
bebased.Theprinciple offalsusinunofalsusinomnibusisnot
applicableinIndia. Atthisjunctureitisnecessarytoconsiderthe
ratiolaiddownbytheApexCourtinthecaseofGunnanaPentayya
vs.StateofA.P.Reportedin2008BHCCO1910inCriminalAppeal
No.292 of 2006, decided on 20th August, 2008, in para 15 the
ApexCourtobservedthat
E.MaximfalsusinunofalsusinomnibusIt
hasnoapplicationinIndiaEvenifmajorportion
ofevidencefoundtobedeficient,residueiffound
sufficient to prove guilt, conviction can be
sustained.

111] ItistobenotedthatpanchwitnessP.W.1SantoshBawne
in his examinationinchief stated that three naxal pamphlets were
seizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandthisfact
is also mentioned in the panchanama Exh.137. The omission
regardingthefactthatthosepamphletswerefoundinthe'hand' of
accusedno.1MaheshTirkiwasbroughtonrecord.Theomissionisin
respect of word 'hand' only. This fact is also deposed by the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
83 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

informantP.W.no.6AtulAvhadandP.W.10AnilBadgujarandthereisa
evidence of muddemalClerkofAheriPolice Station P.W.13Ganesh
Rathod who in his examination stated that these three pamphlets
were brought in Aheri Police Station for depositing the same in
MalkhanaofPoliceStationbyP.W.10AnilBadgujar,however,those
werereturnedbyP.W.13GaneshRathodMuddemalClerktoP.W.10
AnilBadgujarforattachingthesamealongwithChargeSheetandthis
factisreflectedintheextractcopyofMuddemalregisteratExh.276A.
The Muddemal Clerk P.W.13 GaneshRathod admitted at one stage
thatitismentionedintheregisterbutatanotherstageheadmitted
thatitisnotmentionedintheregister.However,onperusalofentry
inMuddemalregisteratExh.276AitrevealsthatthereisanEntry
no.12/2013dated22.8.2013thattheMuddemali.e.threepamphlets
weredepositedintheCrimeno.3017/2013andfromthisentryitis
reflectedthatthreepamphletswerehandedoverbyMuddemalClerk
P.W.13 Ganesh Rathod to P.W.10 Anil Badgujar for filing alongwith
ChargeSheet. Inviewofthisasthereisclearevidenceaboutthe
seizureofthreenaxalpamphletsfromthepossessionofaccusedno.1
MaheshTirki,thesaidthreenaxalpamphletscanbereadinevidence.

112] Atthisjuncture,itisnecessarytoconsidertheratiolaid
downinthecaseof AshishC.Shahv.
M/s.ShethDevelopersPvt.

Ltd.andOrsreportedin2011Cr.L.J.3565whereinitisobserved
inpara12that
(E)EvidenceAct(1of1872),S.135Examination
ofwitnessesProsecutioncanneveraskaccusedto
enterintowitnessboxaswitnessofprosecutionIt
isagainstbasicprinciplesofcriminaljurisprudence.
(Para12)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
84 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Para 12. The learned Counsel for the petitioner

vehementlycontendedthatthedocumentcouldnot
beadmittedinevidenceunlessauthorofthesame
was examined before the Court and in support of
this contention, he relied upon Vishwanath Rai v.
Sachhidamand Singh, AIR 1971 SC 1949. In that
case, witness of one party deposed that a letter
writtenbyoneStohimhadbeenreceivedbyhim.
TheSupremeCourtheldthatburdenliesonother
side toprove itsallegationthattheletterwasnot
writtenbySorthatitwaswrittenincollusionwith
Sandthewitness.However,theSupremeCourtalso
heldthattheletterisrelevantandadmissibletothe
extentofthefactthatSwrotesuchalettertothe
witness with its contents. However, correctness of
thecontentsoftheletterwouldbeprovedonlyby
examiningSasawitnessbecausehewastheauthor.
Inthepresentcase,theauthorandsignatoriesofthe
abovereferredtwolettersareaccusedNos.1and2.
Theletterspurportingtohavebeensignedandsent
bythemwerereceivedbytheManagingDirectorof
the complainant and this fact is deposed to by
witnessSharadDoshi.Inviewofthis,iftheaccused
personsallegethatthesaidletterswerenotsigned
and sent by the accused persons, burden lies on
them to prove the same. The contention of the
learnedCounselthatthecontentsofthisdocument
andthetruthforthesamecannotbeprovedwithout
examining the author of the same is against the
basic principles of criminal jurisprudence, because
prosecutioncanneverasktheaccusedtoenterinto
witnessboxasawitnessofprosecution.Infact,the
accusedcannotbecalledinthewitnessboxevenas
defencewitnessunlesshemakesawrittenrequest
forthesame.Notonlythis,eveninthestatement
under Sec. 313, Cr.P.C. wherein the incriminating
circumstancesarerequiredtobeputtotheaccused
toenablehimtoexplainthesame,theaccusedisnot
boundtoanswerthosequestions,thoughtheCourt
maydrawadverseinferenceagainsthimifhekeeps
quiet. In such circumstances, to suggest that the
document written by and signed by the accused
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
85 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

couldnotbeprovedwithoutexaminingtheaccused
aswitnessoftheprosecutionisagainstthesettled
positionoflawandthereforethiscontentionofthe
learned Counsel for the petitioner is liable to be
rejected.

113] The accused No.1 Mahesh Tirki has not given plausible
explanationaboutthepossessionofthreepamphletswithhiminhis
statementundersection313ofCodeofCriminalProcedureandin
viewofjudgmentof BombayHighCourtinthecaseofAshishC.
Shahv.M/s.ShethDevelopersPvt.Ltd.AndOrs,reportedin2011
Cr.L.J.3563citedsuprathose3naxalpamphletsfoundinpossession
ofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkicanbereadinevidence.

114] Fromthepossessionofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,three
pamphlets (Arts.139 to 141) were seized. On perusal of those
pamphlets,itrevealsthat

i] Art.139 is a pamphlet issued by Bhakapa (Maowadi),

(GadchiroliDivision)makingallegationsagainstthedecisionofthe
GovernmenttodestroythelifeofAadiwasisandshowsthattherewas
oppose to the Government policies implemented in the Gadchiroli
district i.e. implementation of Surjagad Project and Green Hunt
OperationshowinghatredtowardstheGovernment.

ii] Art.140 is a pamphlet issued by Bhumkal Johar Te

DandakaryanyaSpecialZonalCommittee,Bhakapa(Maowadi),titled
as,AmarShahidirkuLalSalam
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
86 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

iii] Art.141 is a pamphlet issued by Bhartachi Communist

Party(Maowadi),MaharashtraRajyaSamitititledas ^jk[k lkaHkkGqu
Bsok jk[k >kysY;kaph] laiyh ukgh y<kbZ vtqu [kSjykathph* andatthe
enditismentionedthat ^[kSjykath gR;kdkaMkP;k lq=/kkjkauk ikBh'kh
?kky.kkjs] iksfylka}kjs nfyrkaP;k gR;k dj.kkjs] nfyrkar ng'kr iljfo.kkjs
egkjkV 'kklu eqnkZckn !-- uotuoknh dzkafr f>ankckn*

115] On perusal of Art.139 issuedbyBha.Ka.Pa.(Maowadi),

(Gadchiroli Division) it reveals that there was oppose to the
Government policies implemented in the Gadchiroli district i.e.
implementation of Surjagad Project and Green Hunt Operation
showinghatredtowardstheGovernment.Art.140issuedbyBhumkal
Johar Dandakarnya Special Zonal Committee, CPI (Maoist) offered
condolenceinfavourofnaxalswhodiedatthehandsofpoliceand
further from the pamphlet Art.141 of CPI (Maoist), Maharashtra
Rajya Samiti, it reveals that it has opposed the Maharashtra
GovernmentontheissueofKhairlanjimatterandattheendofthis
pamphletthesloganNavajanwadiKrantiJindabadisseenandthe
name of Krantikari Janwadi Morcha (RDF) is in Hindi which is a
document of Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) in English as
mentionedintheArticleNo.159whichisaManifestoretrievedfrom
theharddiskseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba
whichappearstobeusedbythemembersofbannedorganizationCPI
(Maoist) and its frontal organization RDF in many videos of RDF
conference and documents found in electronic gadgets like hard
disks,CDs,DVDs,pendriveswhichwereseizedfromhousesearchof
accusedno.6Saibabawhichshowsthataccusedno.1MaheshTirki
and accused no.2 Pandu Narote are the active members of CPI
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
87 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(Maoist) and its frontal organization RDF and they handed over
amount of Rs.5 lacs through P.W.9 Raju Atram to the member of
bannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDFat
BallarshaRailwaystationattheinstanceofladynaxalNarmadakka.

116] Defence has attacked on the ground that P.W.1 Santosh

Bawne is a stock witness who stated exact date and time of the
panchanama Exh.137 and the fact that 16 GB memorycard was
seizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishraandhewas
nothavingknowledgeaboutthedigitalstoragemediabuthestated
that16GBmemorycardwasseizedfromthepossessionofaccused
no.3HemMishra.Itisimportanttonotethatinthepanchanamaat
Exh.137 it is specifically mentioned that 16 GB memorycard of
Sandisk Company was seized from the possession of accused no.3
HemMishraandP.W.1SantoshBawnehasstatedaboutthecontents
ofpanchanama. Hencethiscannotbeagroundtodisbelieve the
evidenceofP.W.1SantoshBawneonthispoint.

117] Accordingtodefencethiswitnesswasnotpresentatthe
timeofpanchanamaastheaccusedwerearrestedatAheribusstand
at5.45p.m.andthereaftertheyweretakentoAheriPoliceStation
and panchanama was prepared at 6.00 p.m. and the FIR was
registeredat9.30p.m.andontheseizedarticleslabelsbearingcrime
number is appearing. It is to be noted that it is the case of the
prosecutionthatafterthearrestofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2
Pandu Narote and no.3HemMishra at Aheribusstandtheywere
takentoAheriPoliceStationandinitiallypanchanamaofseizurewas
prepared and thereafter FIR was registered. Merely because the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
88 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

crimenumberwasputonthelabelsaffixedontheseizedarticlesis
notagroundtodraw inferencethatpanchanamawasdrawnafter
registrationofoffence.

118] The defence tried to bring some inconsistencies in the

evidenceofPIP.W.10AnilBadgujar,P.W.1SantoshBawneandP.W.6
AtulAvhadonthegroundthattheywerenotpresentinAheriPolice
Station.Thesearetheminorcontradictionsinthetestimonyofthis
witnessandthosedonotgototherootofthecase. Hence,their
testimoniescannotbedisbelievedonthispoint.Further,P.W.10Anil
Badgujarhasgivenexplanationaboutthefactthatbymistakehehas
writtenthedate23.8.2013intheFIR. Hence,thedefencecannot
makeuseofit.

119] Accordingtothedefence,P.W.9RajuAtraminhiscross
examinationadmittedthaton21stwhenhehadbeentotheAheri
PoliceStationaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotewere
notpresentthereandhewastakeninPoliceStationaspolicecameto
know from interrogation of accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2
Pandu Narote that he handedover Rs.5 lacs received from
Narmadakka at Ballarsha railwaystation. This shows that accused
no.1MaheshTirki, no.2PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishrawere
arrested before 22.8.2013 from Ballarsha railwaystation and not
fromAheribusstandasallegedbytheprosecution.
It is necessary to reproduce the portion of cross
examinationofP.W.9RajuAtramasunder:
IwastakeninP.S.aspolicecametoknowform
interrogationofaccusedthatIhandedoverRs.5lack
received from Narmadakka at Ballarsha Railway
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
89 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Station. Thereafter,IwasreleasedfromP.S.Onthe
next day I was again called for recording my
statement. My statement was recorded by SDPO
Bawche.Thereafteragainon1492013Iwascalled
atPoliceStation.Whenon21stIwasagaincalledin
P.S.atthattime,PanduandMaheshwerenotpresent
inthePoliceStation.

120] On going through the relevant portion of cross

examinationofP.W.9RajuAtramitisclearthatthiswitnesshasnot
specifically stated the date when police came to know from
interrogation of accused that he handed over Rs.5,00,000/ from
NarmaddakkaatBallarshaRailwaystation.Hehasnotgiventhedate
whenhecametoknowthisfactandhespecificallydeniedthatwhen
on21sthewasagaincalledinpolicestationatthattimeaccusedno.1
Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote were not present in police
stationwhichshowsthattill21sthewasnotknowingthisfact.From
thisitrevealsthataccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteand
no.3HemMishrawerearrestedon22.08.2013andapartfromthe
evidenceofprosecutionwitnessesi.e.theinformantP.W.6AtulAvhad
andPoliceInspectorP.W.10AnilBadgugjar,itgetscorroborationfrom
theconfessionalstatementofacccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2
Pandu Narote at Exh.280 and 286, wherein they stated that they
alongwithaccusedno.3 arrestedatsecludedplacenearAheriBus
Stand on 22.08.2013 and hence, the version of defence that the
accusedno.1to3werearrerstedon20.08.2013atBallarshaRailway
stationisnotacceptable.

121] According to defence 16 GB memorycard of Sandisk

companyallegedlyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3Hem
MishrawastamperedbythepolicebutInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
90 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

SuhasBawcheinhiscrossexaminationstatedthathedidnotseethe
datainthememorycardbyopeningitoncomputerorlaptopandhe
wasnotknowingthefactthatthedatainmemorycardwasprotected
bypasswordandhecametoknowaboutthesamewhenthememory
card was sent to CFSL. Further, P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in his
examinationinchief stated that while interrogating with accused
no.3HemMishrahecametoknowthatsomefileswereprotected
withuniquepasswordandP.W.10AnilBadgujarstatedthathedidnot
seethedatainthememorycardbyopeningitoncomputerorlaptop
andhewasnotknowingthefactthatthedatainmemorycardwas
protectedbypasswordandhecametoknowaboutthesamewhen
the memory card was sent to CFSL. Hence, the contention of the
defencethat16GBmemorycardwastamperedcannotbeaccepted.

122] Itisnotdisputedbythedefencethataccusedno.3Hem
MishrahadbeentoBallarshaRailwayStation.Furtherseizureof16
GBmemorycardunderseizurepanchanamaExh.137thesamewas
depositedwithMuddemalClerkP.W.13GaneshRathodofAheriPolice
Station and to that effect there is entry in muddemal register at
Exh.276A wherein it is mentioned that 16 GB memorycard of
Sandiskcompanyalongwithotherpropertyseizedfromaccusedno.3
HemMishrawasdepositedinMalkhanaofAheriPoliceStationon
22.8.2013. Hence, this was carried out promptly. Further on
examinationof16GBmemorycarddonebyCFSL,Mumbaiitwas
foundthatdatacontainedinsomefoldersandfilesin16GBmemory
cardwaspasswordprotected. HadtheInvestigatingOfficerwanted
tomanipulateorfabricatethedatacontainedin16GBmemorycard
hewouldnothaveinsertedpasswordprotectedfilesinthat16GB
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
91 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

memorycard. In crossexamination suggestion was given by the

defencetoInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheandheadmitted
thathe didnotseethedatainthememorycardbyopeningiton
computerorlaptopandhewasnotknowingthefactthatthedatain
memorycardwasprotectedbypasswordandhecametoknowabout
thesamewhenthememorycardwassenttoCFSL.Hence,itisclear
thathedidnotopenthememorycardonthecomputerandtherefore
he does not know the fact the memorycard was protected by
passwordandthereforeitcanbesaidthatthereisnomanipulation
andfabricationinthe16GBmemorycard.

123] According to the defence CDR and SDR of mobile SIM

cards of accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote were
taken and this fact is admitted by the Investigating Officer P.W.11
SuhasBawcheandinspiteoftheapplicationfiledbythedefenceat
Exh.237 for getting those CDR and SDR the prosecution has not
produced the same on record and hence adverse inference can be
drawnagainsttheprosecution.Insupportofhissubmissionheplaced
relianceonthejudgmentincaseofTomasoBrunovs.StateofU.P.
reportedin2015(1)Crimes105(SC),whereinitisheldthat

(b) Criminal trial Circumstantial evidence

NonproductionofCCTVfootage,noncollectionof
call record (details) and sim details of mobile
phonesseizedfromtheaccusedNotmerefaulty
investigation Amounts to withholding of best
evidence Section 114(g) Indian Evidence Act,
1972 Adverse inference may be drawn against
prosecutionfornotproducingtheaforesaiddetails
particularly CCTV footage while it could
Prosecutionneitherexaminingthedoctordeclaring
the deceased 'brought dead' nor producing the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
92 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

reportthatwaspreparedintheemergencywardof
thehospitalNotproducingdeathintimationsent
tothepolice.(Para27,29,30)

124] ItisimportanttonotethatthemobilephoneshavingSIM
cardswerebelongingtoaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2Pandu
Narote and they must behavingknowledgeaboutthecompanyof
which SIM card they are using alongwith their numbers. Hence,
they could have applied for the CDR and SDR of said SIM cards
belongingtothemandproducedthesameonrecordbutthiswasnot
done by the accused and merelybecause the prosecutionhas not
produced the CDR and SDR of mobile SIM cards of accused no.1
MaheshTirkiandaccusedno.2PanduNarote,theadverseinference
cannotbedrawnagainsttheprosecution.

125] Accordingtothedefence,thenewspaperSaharadated19
82013 wasfoundinpossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishraand
newspaper Lokmat dated 2082013 was found in possession of
accusedno.2PanduNarote. Thisshowsthataccusedwerearrested
on 20.8.2013. However, merely because the accused persons were
foundinpossessionofnewspapersdated1982013doesnotmean
thattheywerearrestedon2082013.Accordingtotheprosecution,
newspaperisusedasidentificationcodebythemembersofbanned
organizationandthisfactisveryclearfromthedocumentatpage
no.90 of Exh.267 wherein it is mentioned that bananas and
newspapers are used as identification code by the members of
CPI(Maoist). Hence, the version of the prosecution appears to be
moreprobablethanthedefence.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
93 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

126] AccordingtodefenceAPIAtulAvhad(P.W.6)inparano.10
ofcrossexaminationadmittedthatsomeportionofprintedFIRwas
keptblankandhesignedonthatthereafterandthecarboncopyof
printedFIRmighthavebeenpreparedandhecannotsaywhetherthe
entriesinColumn3Subclause(b)&(c)areindifferentinkandthe
writerisalsodifferentandtheentryinColumn3(b)(c)arewritten
subsequentlyandinColumn3clause(c)therearesomeoverwriting
andinthecarboncopytheyeariswrittenbycarbonbutingeneral
diaryentryiswritteninhandwritingandthesaidthreeentriesareof
differentinkandhedoesnotrememberwhethertheentireFIRwas
scribedandthenthesethreeentrieswerewritten. Fromthisithas
broughtonrecordthatheleftsomespacesblankintheFIRwhich
showsthatFIRwasantitimeandhewantedtofillupthoseblank
spaceslateron.Hence,thereisfabricationinrespectofthesame.

127] On perusal of evidence of confessional statements of

accusedno.1Maheshandno.2Panduwhichiscorroboratedbythe
evidenceofP.W.9RajuAtram,itrevealsthataccusedno.1Maheshand
no.2Pandureceivedaccusedno.3HemMishrawhocamefromDelhi
atBallarshaRailwayStationandbroughthimtoAheribybusand
thenaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Pandualongwithaccusedno.3
HemMishrawerearrestednearthebusstandatAherion22.08.2013
and not 20.08.2013 and thereafter they were brought to Police
Station, Aheri and in presence of panch witness Santosh Bawne
(P.W.1)personalsearchofaccusedno.3HemMishrawasconducted
and from his possession cash amount of Rs.7,700/, Railwayticket
from Delhi to Ballarsha dated 19.8.2013, 16 GB memorycard of
scandisc company,ATMcardofSBI,hispancard,electionidentity
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
94 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

card, membership card of Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi,

Identitycard,Yatricard,cameraofKodakcompanywithchargerand
sack in which clothes, cover of spect, white cap, newspaper of
RashtriyaSaharapublicationofNewDelhidated19thAugust,2013
werefoundandseizedandwhateverthecorrectionsweremadein
FIRwasbecauseofoversightorbymistakeandnotintentionaland
hence FIR is not antitime. Though the minor contradictions and
discrepancies are brought on recordintheevidence ofP.W.10Anil
Badgujar,theyarenotmaterialinviewofjudgmentofApexCourtin
thecaseofRohtashKumarvs.StateofHaryanareportedin2013
Cri.L.J.3183.

128] Itisimportanttonotethat fromthepersonalsearchof

accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki incriminatingarticles like mobile, three
pamphletsregardingthenaxalliterature,platformticketofBallarsha
railwaystationdtd.28052013alongwithhispersonaldocumentslike
his election identity card were seized and from the possession of
accusedno.2PanduNaroteincriminatingarticleslikeplatformticket
of Ballarsha railway station, Lokmat Marathi newspaper, umbrella
wereseizedalongwithhispersonaldocumentslikehisSBIpassbook,
his birth certificate and birth certificate of his daughter, bonafide
certificateofhisdaughterandhehimself,castecertificate,domicile
certificate,pancard,hiselectionidentitycard,registrationcertificate
ofvehiclebearingNo.MH33/K9656wereseized.

129] It is to be seen that whether the prosecution has

established the fact that accused no.3 Hem Mishra was found
alongwith accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote and
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
95 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

fromhispersonalsearchthearticles16GBmemorycardofSandisk
company,cashofRs.7,500/,KodakCameraalongwithcharger,cloth
bag, white cap, one spec case of black colour, one newspaper of
Sahara,dated1982013,clothes,pancard,twoidentitycardsofJNU
University, one SBI ATM card, one travel card ofDelhiMetro,one
DelhitoBallarshaRailwayticketdated19.8.2013andxeroxcopyof
electionidentitycardi.e.Arts.21to38wereseized.Allthesearticles
wereidentifiedbythepanchwitnessP.W.1SantoshBawne,P.W.6Atul
Avhad and P.W.10 Anil Badgujar. Finding of the articles cap, case
cover of spec, newspaper at Article Nos.21 to 30 in possession of
accusedno.3HemMishra,clearlyshowsthatthesethingsareusedby
the members of banned organization CPI (Maoist) as a code to
recognizetheiridentity.Furtherthisfacthasbeenreflectedfromthe
pageno.90ofdocumentatExh.267.Itisadocumentfoundinthe
harddiskseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.It
showsthatmembersofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)areusing
banana, cap, newspaper as identification code and from the
possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra Kodak camera alongwith
charger was seized and in the internal memory of said camera
photographofaccusedno.6Saibabaandphotographsof16GB,18
GBand32GBmemorycardswerefoundandtherelatedquestions
werealsoputtotheaccusedno.3HemMishrainhisstatementu/s
313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but he merely denied the
same. From the above, it is clear that the members of banned
organizationareusingelectronicgadgetsbystoringtheinformation
ofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)intext,audioandvideoform
andforcirculatingthesametothemembersofbannedorganization
CPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
96 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

130] On perusal of evidence of Investigating Officer Suhas

Bawche(P.W.11),AnilBadgujar(P.W.10),informantAtulAvad(P.W.6),
and Santosh Bawne (P.W.1) which is corroborated by confessional
statement of accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote,
prosecutionhasprovedthataccusedno.3HemMishrawasfoundat
AheriBusStandalongwithaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2Pandu
Narote and his personal search was taken in presence of Santosh
Bawne (P.W.1) and 16 GB memory card of Sandisk company was
seizedfromhispossessionandnothinghasbeenbroughtonrecord
from the crossexaminations of these witnesses to disbelieve their
evidenceaboutseizureof16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompany
fromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishra.Hence,prosecution
hasprovedtheseizureof16GBmemorycardofSandiskCompany
fromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishra. Furtheraccused
no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote in their confessional
statements stated that on 22.8.2013 when they alongwith accused
no.3HemMishrastandingnearAheriBusStoptheywerearrested
and they were taken to Police Station. Finding of incriminating
articlesumbrellaandnewspaperalongwiththeirpersonaldocuments
likeelectionidentitycard,bankpassbook,bonafidecertificate,caste
certificate clearly shows that they were arrested and from their
possession above incriminating articles i.e. three naxal pamphlets
were seized. As such prosecution has proved that on 22.8.2013
accused were arrested near Aheri Police Station and from their
personal searchof accused nos.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNarote
andno.3HemMishraabovediscussedarticleswereseized.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
97 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ArgumentofSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathanonthepointofConfession
inrespectofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNarote

131] ThelearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathansubmittedthaton
28.5.2013accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandaccusedno.2PanduNarote
hadbeentoBallarshaRailwayStationalongwithP.W.9RajuAtramto
handoveramountofRs.5lacstoamemberofbannedorganization
CPI(Maoist)comingfromDelhiasperthedirectionsofladynaxal
Narmadakka and from the evidence of P.W.9 Raju Atram it is
establishedthaton27thofthatmonthaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2
Pandu hadbeento himtoAlapalliandtheytoldhimthathewas
called by naxal Narmadakka. P.W.9 Raju alongwith accused no.1
Maheshandno.2PanduhadbeentoNarmadakkaandNarmadakka
handedover him amount of Rs.5 lacs and directed him to go to
BallarshaRailwaystationalongwithaccusednos.1Maheshandno.2
PanduandhandoversaidamountofRs.5lacswhichhehadbrought
from Narmadakka to one person who was coming to Ballarsha
Railwaystationandonnextdayi.e.on28.5.2013heleftforBallarsha
andintheconfessionalstatements,accusedno.1Maheshandno.2
Pandustatedthattheyhadtoreceivetwopersonson28.5.2013and
on29.5.2013atBallarshaRailwaystationasdirectedbyNarmadakka
and this fact is corroborated from the confessional statements of
accused nos.1 Mahesh andno.2Pandu recordedby J.M.F.C., Aheri
P.W.12NileshwarVyas.

132] HefurthersubmittedthatP.W.12NileshwarVyas,Judicial
Magistrate,FirstClass,Aherirecordedtheconfessionalstatementsof
accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote wherein they
confessed before him that in the month of May, 2013 during
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
98 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Tendupattaseasonaccusedno.2PanduPoraNarotemetaccusedno.1
Maheshandtoldthataccusedno.1Maheshandaccusedno.2Pandu
both were called by Narmadakka in village Todgatta and both of
thematabout300p.m.reachedinvillageTodgattaandnearbyfour
naxalpersonsalongwithweaponwerepresentthereandtheytook
them at the foot of one hill in the forest area where absconding
accused Narmadakka naxalite was present and she asked accused
Mahesh that he should go along with Pandu Narote on 28th May
2013toBallarshaRailwayStationandthereafter,on28thMay2013
PanduandMahesh reachedatBallarshaRailwayStationat1000
a.m.andatthattime,twopersonsreachedthereandaccusedno.2
Pandu Narote went alongwith them on the same day and accused
no.1MaheshTirkistayedtherebecausehewastoldbyNarmadakka
thaton29thMay2013oneRajuAtramhailingfromAlapalliwould
come to Ballarsha Railway Station to give Rs.5,00,000/ and said
amountwastobegiventoonepersonwhowouldcomefromDelhi.
He further submitted that on 29th May, 2013 at about 900 a.m.
accusedno.2RajuAtramandaccusedno.1Maheshweresittinginthe
waitingroom,twopersonscamethereandafteridentification,P.W.9
Rajugavetheamounttothatpersonandhewentaway.

133] He further submitted that P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas was

crossexamined at length but nothing was elicited from his cross
examination to disbelieve his evidence and hence his evidence is
worthtobereliedupononthepointofconfession.Hesubmittedthat
though accused no.1 Mahesh and no.2 Pandu vide application
(Exh.292) retracted the confession made before J.M.F.C., Aheri
(P.W.12Vyas)butitiswellsettledthattheretractedconfessioncanbe
believedifitiscorroboratedonmaterialparticulars,anditisduly
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
99 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

corroboratedbytheevidenceofP.W.9RajuPoriyaAtram.Insupport
ofhissubmissionheplacedrelianceonthefollowingJudgments:

i] RamPrakashv.StateofPunjabreportedinAIR1959
SupremeCourt1(V46C1)inwhichitisheldthat
(a) Evidence Act (1872), S. 30 Scope
Retracted confession of coaccused Admissibility
againstotheraccusedValuetobeattachedtosuch
confession Necessity Extent of corroboration
required.

ii] Hukmaandanotherv.StateofRajasthanreportedin
1976CRI.L.J.1480(Rajasthan)whereinitisheldthat
Itisnodoubttruethatasageneralruleorpracticeit
is unsafe to rely on a confession muchless on a
retractedconfessionunlesstheCourtissatisfiedthat
retracted confession is true and voluntarily made
andhasbeencorroboratedinmaterialparticulars.

134] HesubmittedthatMagistrateP.W.12NileshwarVyashas
followed due procedure of law while recording confessional
statementsofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteand
MagistrateP.W.12NileshwarVyasspecificallystatedinhisevidence
that he has taken precaution that both the accused persons i.e.
accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteandpolicewere
not audible and visible to each other while recording confessional
statements and hence confessional statements made by accused is
substantialpieceofevidence.Insupportofhissubmissionheplaced
relianceonthejudgmentofDivisionBenchincaseofTheStateof
Maharashtrav.AnilaliasRajuNamdeoPatilreportedin2006(2)
AIRBomR513(DB)1959SupremeCourt1(V46C1)inwhichit
isheldthat
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
100 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(C) Criminal P. C. (2 of 1974), S. 164

Confessional statement of accused Recorded by
MagistrateafterfollowingprescribedprocedureNo
policeofficerwaspresentatthattimeConfessional
statementwouldbesubstantialpieceofevidence.

135] He further placed reliance on the judgment of Madras

HighCourtincaseofSivakumarandanotherv.Statereportedin
2003CRI.L.J.3690whereinitisheldthat
(A)EvidenceAct(1of1872),S.24CriminalP.
C.(2of1974),Ss.164,313Retractedconfession
ReliabilityStatementofaccusedwasvoluntaryin
nature Magistrate taking all precautions and
recording it after satisfying himself that statement
wasvoluntaryinnatureItisreliable.1978CriLJ
1251(SC),Rel.on(Paras18,19)

136] Hefurthersubmittedthatafterfilingapplicationbythe
InvestigatingOfficerforrecordingconfessionalstatementsofaccused
no.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarote,on2.9.2013Magistrate
P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas before recording confessional statements of
accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote asked them
whethertheywantedtogivereflectiontimetothinkoverandafter
personalverificationboththeaccusedshowedtheirwillingnessabout
confessionoftheirguiltandhencehehadgivenreflectiontimetothe
accused till 4.9.2013 and again till 6.9.2013 and thereafter on
6.9.2013 he recorded the confessional statement of accused no.1
MaheshTirkiandsameprocedurewasadoptedbytheMagistratefor
accused no.2 Pandu Narote andthesaidfact wasstatedbyP.W.12
Nileshwar Vyas in his evidence and he satisfied himself that the
confessional statements made by the accused were voluntary in
nature. Hence, it appears that Magistrate has given sufficient
reflectiontimetotheaccusedforrecordingtheirstatements.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
101 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

137] In support of his submission he placed reliance on the

judgmentof OrissaHighCourt incaseof JotishRoyv.TheState
reportedin1982CRI.L.J.269whereinitisheldthat

(B)CriminalP.C.(2of1974),S.164Confession
Sufficienttimegiventoaccusedtoreflectandfree
his mind from any possible influence of police
Confession in such circumstances would be
voluntaryinnature.[EvidenceAct(1872),S.29].

(C)PenalCode(45of1860),S.300Murdercase
Conviction of accused on basis of retracted
confession without corroboration Not illega.
[CriminalP.C.(2of1974),S.164].[EvidenceAct
(1872),S.29]

138] Hesubmittedthataccusedno.2Panduinhisconfessional
statement (Exh.286) stated that since last twenty years he was
workingfornaxalandattheinstanceofnaxalNarmadakkaearlierto
theincidenthehadsuppliedradio,torchtothenaxalforwhichhe
received money from naxal and that his conduct of helping the
naxalitesandmembersofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)andits
frontal organization RDF and knowingly facilitating them in their
activitiessinceseveralyearsshowthathehadbeenactingforthem.
Hence,theprovisionsofSection13,18,20,38,39oftheUnlawful
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 r/w Section 120 B of the Indian
Penal Code are clearlyattractedtoaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2
Pandu.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
102 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ArgumentofLd.AdvocateShriGadlingforAccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirkiandno.2PanduNaroteonConfession

139] Per contra, the learned Advocate Shri Gadling for the
accused submitted that prosecution has relied on the illegal
confessionalstatementsmadebyaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2
PanduNarote. Hesubmittedthatconfessionalstatementsmadeby
accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote were recorded
underthethreatandpressureofpoliceandnotmadevoluntarilyand
hence it can not be believed. To substantiate this defence he
submitted that Magistrate P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas who allegedly
recordedconfessionalstatementsof accusedno.1MaheshTirkiand
no.2 Pandu Narote stated in his examinationinchief that accused
no.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotewereproducedbeforehim
on2382013andtheywereremandedtoMCRon292013andon
thesamedayP.W.11SuhasBhawchemadeapplicationforrecording
theconfessionalstatementofaccusedpersonsandonthatdayhehas
notrecordedtheirstatementsashewantedtogivethemreflection
timetothinkoverandon4.9.2013accusedpersonswereproduced
bythepolicewhowerenotconnectedwithinvestigationofthiscase.
He submitted that this was the subjective satisfaction of the
MagistrateP.W.12NileshwarVyasandthereisnomaterialonrecord
thatthosepoliceofficerswerenotconnectedwiththeinvestigationof
thecaseratherthereisevidencetoshowthatthepoliceofficerswho
producedtheaccusedwereverywellconnectedwiththeinvestigation
ofthiscase.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
103 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

140] On this point he placed reliance on para no.23 of the

depositionofInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheatExh.235in
whichhestatedthataccusedweretakentoSPoffice,Gadchiroli,DIG
officeGadchiroliandNaxalcell,Gadchiroliforinterrogationpurpose.
ThisshowsthatallPoliceOfficersofGadchiroliareawereconnected
withtheinvestigationofthecase.HesubmittedthatP.W.12Nileshwar
Vyas stated that both accused were produced before him by HC
AnwarQureshiB.no.1163.Thisshowsthatallthetimeaccusedwere
in the custody of Aheri Police Station and police officers of Aheri
PoliceStationareinterestedinrecordingconfessionalstatementsof
accusedpersonsandtheywereconnectedwithinvestigationofcrime.

141] HesubmittedthatMagistrateP.W.12NileshwarVyasinhis
examinationstatedthaton692013forwantoftimehecouldnot
recordthestatementofno.2PanduPoraNaroteandonthesameday,
InvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawchehasgivenanapplication
that from 992013 onwards they would be engaged in Ganesh
Festivalandetcandduetolawandorderproblem,theywouldnotbe
able to produce the accused no.2 Pandu Narote and they sought
permissioninwritingtoproducetheaccusedon892013andafter
reading application and considering the prevailing circumstances
thereinhemadeanorderthataccusedbeproducedon892013and
on892013atabout330p.m.accusedwasproducedbeforehimfor
recording his statement. From this para it is clear that P.W.12
Nileshwar Vyas directed the Aheri Police to produce accused no.2
Panduon8.9.2013attheinstanceofAheriPoliceStationonlyandhe
wasnotactingindependently.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
104 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

142] At this juncture, learned Advocate Shri Gadling pointed

outthefactthatinthedepositionof P.W.12NileshwarVyasatpara
no.5 where the word guard was typed there should be some
correction and at the same time Marathi deposition should be
considered and in the Marathi deposition it is mentioned that
Whether the guard wasconnectedwiththe case ?. Thelearned
Spl.P.P. Shri Sathainathan admitted the same and prayed for
correctionasperMarathidepositionandAdvocateShriGadlingfor
theaccusedshowednoobjectionforthesame.Hence,correctionwas
madebyinsertingthewordWhether.

143] Hepointedoutatpageno.9ofthedepositionofP.W.12
NileshwarVyasatExh.277onlastthreelineswhereinitismentioned
thataccusednos.1to3alightedatAheribusstandandtheywere
makinggossipwitheachotheratthebusstand.Hesubmittedthat
accordingtoP.W.6APIAvhadaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Pandu
werestandingatsecludedplaceandaccusedno.3Hemcamethere
afterwardsandallegedconfessionalstatementgivenbyaccusedno.2
Pandudoesnotindicatethataccusednos.1,2and3cametogetherat
Aheribusstand. ThisshowscontradictionintheevidenceofP.W.6
APIAvhadandallegedconfessionalstatementofaccusedno.2Pandu
Narote hence there is doubt about recording of confessional
statements.

144] He submitted that P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas stated in his

examination that when the accused were produced before him he
cametoknowthattheywereAdiwasisandbelongingtoMadiyaand
Gond community and he did not make any enquiry with accused
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
105 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

abouttheireducationbeforerecordingtheirconfessionalstatements
andabouttheirfamilybackgroundi.e.theirprofession,business,etc.
and whether they were previously chargesheeted for any offence.
P.W.12NileshwarVyasinthecertificatehasstatedthataccusedwere
familiarwiththeCourtwhilerecordingentireconfessionbutinhis
crossexaminationatparano.20headmittedthatwhentheaccused
wereproducedbeforehimhecametoknowthattheywereAdiwasis
andtheybelongingtoMadiyaandGondcommunityandtheywere
not previously chargesheeted. Hence, version of P.W.12 that the
accusedwerefamiliarwiththecourtisfalseandastheywerenotable
tounderstandthelanguageandhehasnotcertifiedthisfactandhe
signedonconfessionalstatementpreparedbyAheripoliceanddid
notrecordanyconfessionalstatementofanyoftheaccusedandall
the times accused no.1MaheshTirki andno.2Pandu Narote were
producedbytheAheripoliceandundersuchcircumstancesstatement
oftheMagistrateP.W.12NileshwarVyasthataccusedwerenotunder
thefearofpolice,istotallyfalse.

145] He pointed outthat P.W.12NileshwarVyasin hiscross

examinationatpara17admittedthatgivinganinducementorthreat
bypoliceofficerisamisconductandalsoabuseofanauthorityasa
policeofficerandaccusedno.5VijayTirkion24thSept.2013made
complaint that he was threatened by police to make confessional
statementandhedidnotinitiateanyactionagainstthepoliceofficer
anddidnotinitiateanyenquirybecausetheaccuseddidnotgivethe
details of threats and he did not record the question and answers
givenbytheaccusedwithregardtothethreatsinExh.291andhehad
nottakenanyactionagainstpoliceofficerforgivingthreattomake
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
106 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

confession.ThisshowsthatP.W.12NileshwarVyaswasnotimpartial
towardstheaccused.

146] Hesubmittedthatinparano.18ofthecrossexamination
P.W.12NileshwarVyasadmittedthatnoneoftheaccusedhadmade
application before him about the illtreatment by the police during
investigationandaccusedno.1and2madewrittenapplicationbefore
him about the illtreatment meted by them after recording their
statement and he had not taken any action on the basis of their
written application and even did not call any report from police
officeranddidnottakecognizanceoftheircomplaints.Hefurther
admittedthathecametoknowthatsaidconfessionwasvoluntarily
made and application Exh.292 for illtreatment was made
subsequentlyhence,hedidnottakeanycognizanceandonthesaid
application he called say of APP and as the said application was
receivedthroughenvelophedirectedhisstafftoattachwiththecase
papersandtherewasendorsementtothateffectonitbutclerkofthe
courtdidnotput itbeforehim. Hesubmittedthattheexplanation
givenbyP.W.12NileshwarVyascannotbeaccepted.

147] Hereliedonthecrossexaminationof P.W.12Nileshwar

Vyaswhereinheindirectlyadmittedthathemighthavepassedorder
inthiscaseforhandcuffingtheaccusedwhileproducingtheaccused
beforethecourtandtheaccusedmighthavegivenapplicationbefore
theCourtduringinvestigationnottohandcuffwhileproducingthem
beforetheCourtandtheymighthavegivenapplicationbeforehim
thattheywereproducedinhandcuffconditionandhandcuffshould
beremovedandhemightnothavetakenthecognizanceforthesame.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
107 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ThisadmissiononthepartofP.W.12NileshwarVyasshowsthatthere
wasilltreatmenttotheaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2Pandu
Naroteatthehandsofpoliceandtheywereunderthepressureof
policeandmadeconfessionalstatementsduetothreatsandfearof
thepolice.

ConclusiononthepointofConfessionStatementsofaccusedno.1
MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarote

148] ToappreciatethesubmissionsmadebythelearnedSpl.P.P.
ShriSathainathanfortheprosecutionandAdvocateShriGadlingfor
accusedinrespectofconfessionsmadebyaccusedno.1MaheshTirki
andno.2PanduNarote,itisnecessarytokeepinmindtherelated
provisions dealing with offence and its ingredients of which the
prosecutionallegesthataccusedhasbeenchargedwithandthento
marshaltheevidenceaspertherequirementoflawtobringhomethe
charges.

149] ThewordConfessionhasnotbeendefinedintheCode
ofCriminalProcedure,1973orinTheIndianEvidenceAct.ThePrivy
CouncilinthecaseofPakalaNarayanswamivs.Emperor,reported
inAIR1939PC47 heldthatthewordconfessionasusedinthe
Evidence Act cannot be construed as meaning a statement by an
accused suggesting the inference that he committed the crime. A
confession must either admit in terms the offence, or at any rate
substantiallyallthefactswhichconstitutetheoffence. Astatement
thatcontainsselfexculpatorymattercannotamounttoaconfession,
if the exculpatory statement is of some fact, which if true, would
negativetheoffenceallegedtobeconfessed.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
108 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

150] ThesaidprincipleoflawlaiddownwasfollowedbyApex
CourtinthecaseofPalvinderKaurvs.StateofPunjabreportedin
AIR1952SC354.

151] Thelawrelatingtoconfessionislaiddownu/s24,25,26
of the Evidence Act 1872. According to Section 24 of the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872, confession caused by inducement threat or
promise is inadmissible. Further, according to Sec.25 confession
before police is inadmissible. As per Sec.26 confession made by
accusedbeforeMagistrateisadmissible.

152] The provisions of Sec.164 of the Code of Criminal

ProcedureandtheguidelinesasissuedbyHighCourtofJudicature,
BombaytotheCriminalCourtsandsubordinateofficersinChapterI
of Criminal Manual lays down the procedure to be followed by
JudicialMagisterialFirstClass,whilerecordingconfession.

153] The provisions relating to recording of confession

statement by Magistrate is under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. are is
reproducedasunder:

Section 164 : Recording of confessions and

statements.
(1) Any Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial
Magistratemay, whetherornothehasjurisdiction
inthecase,recordanyconfession or statement
madetohiminthecourseofaninvestigationunder
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
109 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

this Chapter or under any other law for the time

beinginforce,oratanytimeafterwardsbeforethe
commencementoftheinquiryortrial:
Provided that no confession shall be
recordedbyapoliceofficeronwhomanypowerof
aMagistratehasbeenconferredunder anylawfor
thetimebeinginforce.

(2)TheMagistrateshall,beforerecordinganysuch
confession, explain to the person making it
thatheisnotboundtomakeaconfessionandthat,
ifhedoesso,itmaybeusedasevidence against
him;andtheMagistrateshallnotrecordanysuch
confession unless, upon questioning the person
makingit,hehasreasontobelievethatitisbeing
madevoluntarily.

(3)Ifatanytimebeforetheconfessionisrecorded,
the person appearing before the Magistrate states
that he isnot willingtomaketheconfession,the
Magistrateshallnotauthorisethedetentionofsuch
personinpolicecustody.

(4) Any such confession shall be recorded in the

manner provided in section 281 for recording the
examinationofan accusedpersonandshallbe
signedbythepersonmakingthe confession ; and
theMagistrateshallmakeamemorandumat the
footofsuchrecordtothefollowingeffect:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
110 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

"Ihaveexplainedto(name)thatheisnotboundto
make a confession and that, if he does so, any
confession he may make may be used as evidence
against him and I believe that this confession was
voluntarily made. It was takenin my presence and
hearing,andwasreadovertothepersonmakingit
andadmittedbyhimtobecorrect,anditcontainsa
fullandtrueaccountofthestatementmadebyhim.

(Signed)A.B.
Magistrate".

(5)Anystatement(otherthanaconfession)made
undersub section (1) shall be recorded in such
manner hereinafter provided for the recording of
evidenceasis,intheopinionoftheMagistrate,best
fitted to the circumstances of the case ; and the
Magistrateshallhavepowertoadministeroathto
thepersonwhosestatementissorecorded.

(6) The Magistrate recording a confession or

statementunder thissectionshallforwardittothe
Magistratebywhomthecaseistobeinquiredinto
ortried.

154] TheprovisionsofCriminalManualissuedbyBombayHigh
Court for the guidance lays down detail procedure for recording
confessionbyMagistrateanditlaysdownthepreliminaryquestions
whicharetobeputtotheaccusedbyMagistrateinordertosatisfy
voluntarinessofconfessionanditalsofurtherprescribesforissuance
ofcertificateafterrecordingofconfessionalstatementbyMagistrate
afterrecordingthesame.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
111 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

155] In the present case, according to the prosecution the

confessionwasdulyrecordedbytheMagistrateP.W.12NileshwarVyas
andaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Pandumadevoluntaryconfession
andwithoutpressurebypolice. Hence,itcanberelied. However,
AdvocateShriGadlingfortheaccusedsubmittedthattheconfession
recorded by P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas cannot be relied on following
grounds

i] TheaccusedNo.1Maheshandno.2Panduretractedthe
confession made by them by filing application at Exh.292 before
P.W.12NileshwarVyas.
ii] TheconfessionmadebyaccusedNo.1Maheshandno.2
Panduwasnotvoluntaryoneanditwasunderpressureandthreatof
police.

iii] The accused No.1 Mahesh and no.2 Pandu were

handcuffedwhentheywerebroughttoCourtforrecordingconfession
andthisshowsthattheconfessionwasnotvoluntary.

iv] The Magistrate has not taken any action against police
afterfilingapplicationbyaccusedNo.1Maheshandno.2Panduat
Exh.292.

v] The accused No.1 Mahesh and no.2 Pandu know only

Gondi language and they are not knowing Marathi and Hindi
language.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
112 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

vi] No sufficient time was given by the Magistrate P.W.12

NileshwarVyasforreflection.

ConfessionandRetraction

156] Accused no.1 Mahesh and no.2 Pandu retracted their

confessionvideapplication(Exh.292).Inthesaidapplication,these
accusedhaveexpressedthatthepolicehadsubjectedthemtophysical
andmentalharassmentduetowhichfeardevelopedintheirmind.
Whenevertheirrelativesusedtocometomeetthem,thepolicewere
sayingtheseaccusedthatincasetheydidnotmakeconfession,their
relativeswouldbeentangledinothercases.Thus,itisthecontention
ofaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Panduthattheywerecompelledto
give confession on account of threat and pressure. On perusal of
application(Exh.292)itrevealsthattheseaccusedjointlymadethis
application in Hindi language and it bears signatures of both the
accusedinMarathilanguage.

157] The law relating to appreciation of confession and

retractionthereofislaiddownbyFullBenchofApexCourtincase
ofShankaria.v.StateofRajasthanreportedinAIR1978Supreme
Court1248inpara22ofthejudgment.Parano.22ofthejudgmentis
reproducedasunder:

22.Itiswellsettledthataconfession,ifvoluntarily
andtruthfullymade,isanefficaciousproofofguilt.
Therefore, when in a capital case the prosecution
demands a conviction ofthe accusedprimarilyon
the basis of his confession recorded under S.164,
Cr.P.C.,theCourtmustapplyadoubletest:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
113 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1] Whether the confession was perfectly

voluntary?
2]Ifso,whetheritistrueandtruthworthy?

Satisfactionofthefirsttestisa sinequanon
for itsadmissibilityin evidence. Ifthe confession
appears to the Court to have been caused by any
inducement,threatorpromisesuchasismentioned
in S. 24, Evidence Act, it must be excluded and
rejectedbrevimanu.Insuchacase,thequestionof
proceedingfurthertoapplythesecondtest,doesnot
arise. If the first test is satisfied, the court must,
beforeactingupontheconfessionreachthefinding
thatwhatisstatedthereinistrueandreliable.For
judging the reliability of such a confession, or for
that matter of any substantive piece of evidence,
there is no rigid canon of universal application.
Evenso,onebroadmethodwhichmaybeusefulin
most cases for evaluating a confession may be
indicated. TheCourtshouldcarefullyexaminethe
confession and compare it with the rest of the
evidence, in the light of the surrounding
circumstancesandprobabilitiesofthe case. Ifon
such examination and comparison, the confession
appears to be a probable catalogue of events and
naturallyfitsinwiththerestoftheevidenceandthe
surroundingcircumstances,itmaybetakentohave
satisfiedthesecondtest.

Further,inparano.85ofthejudgmentitisobservedas
under:
85. Wheretheaccused,whileretractinghis
confession,didnotsaythathewastutoredbypolice
tomaketheconfessionbutonlysaidthathemadeit
under compulsion andthreat andwasfalse anda
perusal of the confessional statement would show
that prima facie there was nothing improbable or
unbelievable in it; that it appeared to be a
spontaneous account, studded with such vivid
detailsaboutthemannerofthecommissionofthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
114 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

crimesinquestion,whichonlytheperpetratorofthe
crimes could know, and the confession received
assurance in several material particulars from
reliable independent evidence, mainly of
circumstantial character, held the confession,
coupledwiththeotherevidenceontherecord,had
unerringly and indubitably brought home the
chargestotheaccused.

158] On the point of retracted confession of coaccused and

admissibilityagainstotheraccusedFullBenchofApexCourtincase
ofRamPrakash.v.StateofPunjabreportedinAIR1959Supreme
Court1inpara6observedasunder:

Section30,EvidenceAct,makesitclearthatwhere
morepersonsthanonearebeingtriedjointlyforthe
sameoffence,aconfessionmadebyanyoneofthem
affectinghimselfandanyoneofhiscoaccusedcan
be taken into consideration by the court not only
againstthemakeroftheconfessionbutalsoagainst
hiscoaccused.TheEvidenceActnowhereprovides
thatiftheconfessionisretracted,ifcannotbetaken
into consideration against the coaccused or the
confessingaccused. Accordingly,theprovisionsof
the Evidence Act do not prevent the Court from
taking into consideration a retracted confession
againsttheconfessingaccusedandhiscoaccused.

Theamountofcredibilitytobeattached
to a retracted confession, however, would depend
upon the circumstances of each particular case.
Although a retracted confession is admissible
against a coaccused by virtue of S. 30, Evidence
Act, as a matterofprudence andpractice acourt
would not ordinarily act upon it to convict a co
accused without the strongest and fullest
corroboration on material particulars. The
corroborationinthefullsenseimpliescorroboration
notonlyastothefactumofthecrimebutalsoasto
theconnectionofthecoaccusedwiththatcrime.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
115 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

159] When the accused makes confession and there is some

exculpatorystatementandifthesaidstatementisfoundtobetruthful
thenitcanbetakenintoconsideration.However,ifitisfoundtobe
nottruthfulitwillbeproperforthecourttorejectsomeexculpatory
partorinculpatorypartwhichisnottruthful. Atthisjuncture,itis
necessarytoconsiderratiolaiddownbyDelhiHighCourtincaseof
BabuLalandanotherv.TheStateandothersreportedin1982
Cri.L.J.41,whereinitisobservedasunder:

(A)EvidenceAct(1of1872),S.24Confessional
statementconsistingofinculpatoryandexculpatory
partsAcceptanceofonepartPermissibility.
Where a confession consists of exculpatory
andinculpatoryparts,itispermissibletobelieveone
partanddisbelieveanother.1979Cri.L.J.645,Rel.
on(Para12)

160] The Apex Court in the case of Mohammed Ajmal

Mohammad Amir Kasab alias Abu Mujahid .v. State of
Maharashtrareportedin(2012)SCC1heldthat

Criminal Procedure Code, 1972 S. 164

Confession before Magistrate Whether voluntary
andtruthfulSomereferenceinconfessionabout
c0accused(TA2andTA3)whowereinvolvedonly
inpreparationofmapsandnotinactualattacks)
being unsatisfactory But regarding rest of
confession,held,thereisnoreasontodoubtthatif
wasnotmadevoluntarilyandwithoutanyinfluence
or duress from any external agency Magistrate
fully resorted to all safeguards under S.164 CrPC
andgaveTA1sufficienttime(i.e.3daystime)to
reflectastowhetherhereallywantedtomakethe
confession.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
116 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

161] Inviewofsettledprincipleoflawitistobeseenwhether
theconfessionalstatementsmadebyaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2
Pandu before the Magistrate P.W.12Nileshwar Vyaswere voluntary
andtruthfulandtheexculpatorypartofconfessioncanbebelieved.
Inthepresentcaseattheendofconfession,accusedno.1Maheshand
no.2 Pandu stated that naxalsusedtoassaultthemandpressurize
themtodotheworkasdirectedbythenaxals.Thisisanexculpatory
part. Further,itistobeseenwhetherthesaidexculpatorypartis
truthful.Inboththeconfessionalstatementstheaccusedno.1Mahesh
andno.2Panduclearlystatedthefactthatforthreetofourtimesat
the instance of underground naxal Narmadakka they had gone to
Ballarsha Railway station to receive the member of banned
organizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDFandthey
took them to Abuzmad forest area as directed by Narmadakka for
meeting with senior leaders of Maoist cadre who were hiding in
Abuzmad forest area and the accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki & No.2
PanduNarotewerefullywellawarethattherewasmeetingofthe
undergroundmembersofbannedterroristorganization.

162] Hadtheaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Panduwerenot
activemembersofthesaidorganisationtheywouldnothaveacted
three times to bring Maoist leaders to Abuzmad forest area for
attendingthemeetingsandtheywouldhavemadecomplaintabout
thesameeithertopoliceofAheriorpoliceofBallarshawherethey
had gone to receive the members of banned organisation at the
instanceofundergroundnaxalNarmadakka.AtBallarshatheycould
have approachedtoPolice Station buttheirconduct toreceivethe
membersofbannedorganisationfor2/3timesclearlyshowsthatthey
areactivemembersofsuchbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)andits
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
117 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

frontalorganisationRDF. Thisconductonthepartofaccusedno.1
Maheshandno.2Pandushowsthatexculpatorypartmadebybothof
theminconfessionistruthfulone.

RetractionofConfession

163] In the present case,the accusedno.1Maheshandno.2

PandutriedtoretracttheirconfessionmadebeforeMagistrate(P.W.12
Nileshwar Vyas) by filing application vide Exh.292 on 3.10.2015.
ThesaidapplicationiswritteninHindilanguageandbelowthesaid
application both the accused signed in Marathi language. The
accused nos.1 Mahesh and no.2 Pandu in their statement u/s 313
Cr.P.C. specifically have taken defence that the confession was
recordedunderthepressureofpolice. Intheapplication(Exh.292)
theseaccusedhaveexpressedthatthepolicehadsubjectedthemto
physicalandmentalharassmentduetowhichfeardevelopedintheir
mindandfurthertheystatedthatwhenevertheirrelativesusedto
cometomeetthem,thepolicetoldtheseaccusedthatincasetheydo
not make confession, their relatives would be entangled in other
cases.Thus,itiscontentionofaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Pandu
thattheywerecompelledtogiveconfessiononaccountofthreatand
pressure.

164] Theaccusedno.1Maheshinhisstatementu/s313Cr.P.C.
hastakendefencethathemadeconfessionunderthethreatofpolice.
Therelevantquestionsputtoaccusedno.1Maheshinhisstatement
u/s313Cr.P.C.arereproducedasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
118 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Q.67: Ithasfurthercomeinhisevidencethaton29
2013theinvestigatingofficerAherimadeapplication
beforehimforrecordingthestatementofyouaccused
regardingconfessionofyouaccusedMaheshTirkiand
PanduNaroteandonthesameday,hehasinformed
you both the accused that the police have made
applicationthattheyweregoingtomakeconfessional
statement.Whathaveyoutosayaboutit?

Ans: Police assaulted me, hence, I showed our

willingnesstogivestatement.

Q.68: Ithasfurthercomeinhisevidencethathealso
asked youtothinkaboutmakingofconfessionand
onthatdayyouwerewillingtomakeconfessionbut
hehasnotrecordedyourstatementsashewantedto
giveyoureflectiontimetothinkoverandhemadeit
knowntoyoubothaccusedthatifyouweretomake
confessionalstatements.Whathaveyoutosayabout
it?

Ans: Yes. Police werestandingatthedoor ofcourt

hall.

Q.69: Ithasfurthercomeinhisevidencethat after

personalverificationofbothofyou,youshowedyour
willingnessabouttheconfessionofyourguilt,hence,
hehadgivenyoutimetill492013andyouboththe
accusedproducedon492013.Whathaveyoutosay
aboutit?

Ans: Yes. Police werestandingatthedoor ofcourt

hall.

Q.72: It has further come in his evidence that after

yourproductionhehasplacedyouintowitnessbox
onebyoneandhas takentheprecautionthat you
both the accused and police were not audible and
visibletoeachotherandheappraisedyouboththe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
119 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accused that you were not in police custody. What

haveyoutosayaboutit?

Ans: Yes.Magistrateaskedthequestionstome,but
policewerepresentatthedoorofthehallofthecourt.

165] Theaccusedno.2PanduNaroteinhisstatementu/s313
Cr.P.C.hasalsotakenthesamedefenceandtherelevantquestionsput
toaccused no.2 PanduNaroteinhisstatement u/s313Cr.P.C.are
reproducedasunder:

Q.76: Ithasfurthercomeinhisevidencethaton29
2013theinvestigatingofficerAherimadeapplication
beforehimforrecordingthestatementofyouaccused
regardingconfessionofyouaccusedMaheshTirkiand
PanduNaroteandonthesameday,hehasinformed
you both the accused that the police have made
applicationthattheyweregoingtomakeconfessional
statement.Whathaveyoutosayaboutit?

Ans:Police assaulted me, hence, we showed our

willingnesstogivestatement.

Q.77: Ithasfurthercomeinhisevidencethathealso
askedyoutothinkaboutmakingofconfessionandon
thatdayyouwerewillingtomakeconfessionbuthe
hasnotrecordedyourstatementsashewantedtogive
you reflection time to think over and he made it
knowntoyoubothaccusedthatifyouweretomake
confessionalstatements.Whathaveyoutosayabout
it?

Ans: Yes. Policewerestandingatthedoor ofcourt

hall.

Q.78: Ithasfurthercomeinhisevidencethat after

personalverificationofbothofyou,youshowedyour
willingnessabouttheconfessionofyourguilt,hence,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
120 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

hehadgivenyoutimetill492013andyouboththe
accusedproducedon492013.Whathaveyoutosay
aboutit?

Ans: Yes. Police werestandingatthedoor ofcourt

hall.
Q.80: Ithasfurthercomeinhisevidencethatafter
yourproductionhehasplacedyouintowitnessbox
onebyoneandhas takentheprecautionthat you
both the accused and police were not audible and
visibletoeachotherandheappraisedyouboththe
accused that you were not in police custody or
magisterialcustody.Whathaveyoutosayaboutit?

Ans: Yes. Magistrate asked the questions to us and

butpolicewerepresentatthedoorofthehallofthe
court.

166] Accordingtobothaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Pandu,
theyretractedtheearlierconfessionbyfilingapplication(Exh.292)
butongoingthroughtheconfessionrecordedbyMagistrateP.W.12
NileshwarVyasitisclearlyrevealedthattheystatedthatnaxalites
usedtoassaultthemandpressurizethemtodotheworkasdirected
by the naxalites. Had there been really mental and physical
harassmenttoaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Panduatthehandsof
policeandhadtheymadeconfessionalstatementunderthecoercion
or threats at the hands of police both accused could have stated
before the Magistrate about the said fact as they stated in the
retractionapplication(Exh.292)thatbecauseoffearofpolicethey
madeconfessionalstatementrecordedbyP.W.12NileshwarVyas.This
showsthattheretractionmadebytheaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2
Pandu about the confession that they made confession under the
threatorcoercionbypoliceisfalse. Further,P.W.12NielshwarVyas
stated that he did not take any cognizance on the application of
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
121 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

retraction (Exh.292) filed by accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2

PanduNaroteasatthetimeofrecordingconfessionalstatements,he
hadsatisfiedthataccusedweremakingtheirconfessionoutoftheir
freewillandwithoutpressureofpolice.Hence,itcannotberelied
upon.

167] Theconfessionwaschallengedonthegroundthataccused
no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote are knowing Gondi
languageandtheyarenotknowingHindiandMarathilanguageand
thisdefencewastakenbyaccusedintheirstatementu/s313ofCr.P.C.
andduringcrossexaminationofMagistrateP.W.12NileshwarVyas.In
crossexamination of Magistrate P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas, suggestion
wasputtohimthataccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Panduwerenot
conversant with Marathi language in which statements were
recorded. ButthissuggestionwasdeniedbyP.W.12NileshwarVyas
and he clearly stated that bothaccused were speaking in Hindiin
court.P.W.12NileshwarVyasdeniedthataccusedwerenotabletotalk
inMarathiandnotknowingHindi.Itisimportanttonotethatafter
recordingstatementu/s313ofCr.P.C.,accusedno.1MaheshandNo.2
PandusignedbelowtheirrespectivestatementsinMarathilanguage.
The accused no.1 Mahesh and No.2Pandu retractedconfession by
filingjointapplicationatExh.292. ThesaidapplicationisinHindi
languageandbelowthesaidapplicationaccusedno.1Maheshand
No.2 Pandu also signed in Marathi language and in the said
application it is not stated that they were not knowing Marathi
language. This showsthat accusedno.1Maheshandno.2Pandu
werewellconversantwithMarathiandHindilanguage.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
122 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

168] Further,theApexcourtinthecaseofWariyamSinghand
others.v.StateofU.P. reportedin AIR1996SupremeCourt305
whiledealingthecaseunderTADAActobservedasunder:

(E) Terrorist and Disruptive Activities

(Prevention)Act(28of1987,S.15Confession
Recordingof,byPoliceOfficerinHindilanguage
None of accused expressing any difficulty in
understanding language in which confessional
statement was recorded Plea raised by one of
accusedafterabout1andyearsthathecouldnot
followsaidlanguageNottenable.(Para14)

169] Inviewofabovethedefenceoftheaccusedisthatthey
werenotknowingMarathilanguageisfalse.

Whethersufficienttimewasgivenforreflection.

170] Further it has come on record that when accused were

producedbeforetheMagistrateP.W.12NileshwarVyason23.8.2013
then they were remanded to magisterial custody till 2.9.2013 and
thereaftertheywereagainproducedfromJailtoCourton2.9.2013
andonthatdayInvestigatingOfficermadeapplicationforrecording
confessionalstatementsofaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Panduand
further the evidence of Magistrate P.W.12 Nilehswar Vyas clearly
revealsthatthereafteron4.9.2013accusedno.1MaheshandNo.2
Pandu were produced by escort police officers who were not
connected with the investigation of the case. Nothing has been
broughtonrecordtoshowthatthepoliceofficerswhowerestanding
outsidethecourtroomwereconnectedwiththeinvestigationofthis
case.Thepoliceofficerwhowereescortingtheaccusedno.1Mahesh
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
123 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

andno.2Pandufromjailtocourttimetotimecannotbeconsidered
aspoliceofficerswhoareinvolvedintheinvestigationofcrimeor
case. Atthisjuncture,itisnecessarytoconsiderratiolaiddownby
Orissa High Court in case of Kurungalanga Luxman v. State
reportedin1964(1)Cri.L.J.464whereinitisobservedasunder:

(C) Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S.26, S.24

AdmissibilityofconfessionUndertrialprisoner
Escortingof,toMagistrateEscortingPoliceOfficer
not connected with investigation Magistrate
ascertaining voluntary nature of confession
Confessionheldwasvoluntary.

171] IthascomeintheevidenceofMagistrateP.W.12Nileshwar
Vyas that accused no.1 MaheshTirki and no.2Pandu Narote were
produced before him on 2382013 and thereafter they were
remanded to MCR on 292013 and on 292013 the investigating
officerAheriP.W.11SuhasBawchemadeapplicationbeforehimfor
recordingthe confessionalstatementsofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki
andno.2PanduNaroteandheinformedboththeaccusedaboutthe
sameandaskedthemtothinkaboutmakingofconfession. Ithas
furthercomeinhisexaminationthatonthatdaybothaccusedno.1
Maheshandno.2Panduwerewillingtomakeconfessionbuthehas
notrecordedtheirstatementsas hewantedtogivethemreflection
timetothinkoverandhemadeitknowntobothaccusedthatifthey
wanttomakeconfessionalstatementsthenitcanbeusedasevidence
againstthem.

172] ThiswitnessP.W.12NileshwarVyasfurtherstatedthathe
putcertainquestionstoaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Panduoneby
one and prepared their memorandum statements separately and
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
124 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

noted down all the questions and answers as stated by them and
examined them one by one and the other accused was out of the
courtandnotinpresenceofboth.MagistrateP.W.12Vyashastaken
precaution while recording statement of accused no.1 Mahesh and
no.2Panduthataccusedandpoliceofficerspresentincourtpremises
were not visible to each other. The police officer who produced
accused were not connected with investigation of the case.
Memorandumregardingquestionsandanswersputtoaccusedno.2
Pandu Narote is at Exh.278 andmemorandumregardingquestions
andanswersputtoMaheshTirkiisatExh.279.Aftersatisfyingthat
the accused were making confessional statements voluntarily he
recordedthestatementofaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Panduand
afterrecordingstatementshetooksignatureofbothaccusedontheir
respectiveconfessionalstatementsandsignedhimselfandthereafter
several certificate appended vide Exh.287 (Certificate I), Exh.288
(CertificateII)andExh.289(CertificateIII)asperCriminalmanual
issuedbytheHighCourt. Hespecificallystatedthatwhenaccused
no.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteretractedtheirconfessional
statements by filing application Exh.292 he did not take any
cognizance because he did not find any substance in the said
application (Exh.292) as at the time of recording confessional
statements, he had satisfied that accused were making their
confessionoutoftheirfreewillandwithoutpressureofpolice.

173] FromtheevidenceofMagistrateP.W.12NileshwarVyasit
revealsthatafterproductionofaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Pandu
heplacedthemintowitnessboxonebyoneandtakenprecautionthat
both the accused and police were not audible and visible to each
other.Thereafter,heappraisedboththeaccusedthattheywerenotin
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
125 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

police custody and asked one by one whether they had any ill
treatment in police custody and asked them whether they were
induced by police to make confessional statements to which they
replied in negative. A Magistrate (P.W.12 Vyas) also asked accused
no.1 Mahesh and no.2 Pandu whether they have been induced by
policeoranyotherpersonsresponsiblefortheirarresttowhichthey
replied in negative. He informed themthat he wanted toexamine
theminpersonandthenheexaminedbodyofboththeaccusedand
foundnoexternalinjuriesonthebodyofboththeaccused. After
makingnotesofallquestionsandrepliesgivenbyboththeaccused
and aftermakingtheseparatenoteofthesame,P.W.12Nileshwar
Vyas realized that the accused had given satisfactory answers and
ready to give confessionsvoluntarily. Therefore,he adjournedthe
matter for two days till 692013 for giving reflection time and
explainedboththeaccusedthattheywouldbeinmagisterialcustody.
FromcrossexaminationofP.W.12NileshwarVyas,itrevealsthatthere
isnosuggestiononthepartofdefenceaboutgivingreflectiontimeto
accusedforconfession.

Corroboration to the confessional statement made by accused

no.1Maheshandno.2PandubyevidenceofP.W.9RajuAtram

174] Both the accused no.1 Mahesh and No.2 Pandu have
narrateddetailstoryabouttheparticularroleplayedbythemanditis
clear from their confessional statements that underground naxal
Narmadakka had called both accused in village Todgatta and
accordingly both of them at about 300 p.m. reached in village
Todgatta and nearby four naxal persons alongwith weapon were
present there and naxal accused Narmadakka asked accused no.1
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
126 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Maheshthatheshouldgoalongwithaccusedno.2PanduNaroteon
28thMay2013toBallarshaRailwayStationandthereafter,on28th
May2013bothaccusedreachedatBallarshaRailwayStationat1000
a.m.andatthattime,twopersonsreachedthereandaccusedno.2
Pandu Narote went alongwith them on the same day and accused
no.1MaheshTirkistayedtherebecausehewastoldbyNarmadakka
thaton29thMay2013oneRajuAtram(P.W.9)hailingfromAlapalli
would cometoBallarshaRailwayStationtohandovercashamount
ofRs.5,00,000/andsaidamountwastobegiventoonepersonwho
wouldcomefromDelhi.

175] Theyfurtherstatedthaton29thMay,2013atabout900
a.m.whenRajuAtram(P.W.9)andaccusedno.1Maheshweresitting
inthewaitingroom,twopersonscamethereandafteridentification,
P.W.9RajuAtramgavetheamounttothatpersonandhewentaway.
Againon14August2013Narmadakkacametohisvillagealongwith
15to20naxalitesandbothaccusedwerecalledintheforestsituated
outside the village and when they went there Narmadakka was
presentalongwitharmednaxalitesandshetoldthemthaton20/22
August2013twopersonswerecomingtoBallarshaRailwayStation
andtheywouldcomeeither10.00a.m.or2.00p.m.andsheaskedto
takethesepeopleatvillageLendarandhaltatthehouseofKomati
BabusituatedatvillageLendarandNarmadakkahadgivenonechit
for handing over to said persons which would be used for
identification purpose and in themorningatabout 9.00a.m.both
accusedwenttoBallarshaRailwayStationandtheytookthatperson
i.e. accused no.3 Hem Mishra toAheribyS.T.busandwhenthey
weretalkingatAheribusstand,bythattimepolicearrestedaccused
no.1Mahesh,no.2Panduandno.3HemMishra.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
127 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

176] Asdiscussedabove,fromtheevidenceofP.W.9RajuAtram
whichistestedbylearneddefencecounselduringcrossexamination
andnothinghasbeenelicitedfromhiscrossexaminationtodisbelieve
hisevidenceonthepointthatintheyear2013therewasacampat
Murewadawhereheacquaintedwithaccusedno.2PanduNaroteand
no.1MaheshTirkiandthataccusedno.2PanduNarotecametohim
and told that Narmadakka is calling him and thereupon, he told
accusedno.2PanduNarotethathehadcomebackfromhisworkand
hewastiredandhewillgoafter23daysbuthewastoldbyaccused
no.2PanduNarotethattherewasurgentworkandtherefore,onthe
twowheelerhewentwithaccusedno.2PanduonhisMotorCyclein
the forest of Todalgatta and reached there at about 700 p.m.
Further, after half an hour, one lady by name Narmadakka came
there,hewasnotknowingherandhecouldnotidentifyherasitwas
dark and that accused no.2 Pandu Narote told him that she was
Narmadakkaandshetoldhimthatwhetherhewoulddoherworkfor
handingoverRs.5LacswhenMaheshandPanduwouldmeethimat
BallarshaRailwayStationandshehandedovermoneyinthepacket
and he did not count the said money and on 27th of that month
accusedno.2PanduNaroteandno.1MaheshTirkihadcometohis
house at Alapalli and told him that he should come at Ballarsha
RailwayStationalongwithsaidmoneywhichhehadreceivedfrom
Narmadakkaandonnextdaylefthishouse.

177] Thereafter,on2952013heleftbybusat600a.m.and
reached Ballarsha Railway Station at 1000 a.m., accused no.1
Maheshandaccusedno.2PanduweresittinginthehallofRailway
Station, he went and sat with them and thereafter, two unknown
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
128 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

persons came there and accused no.2 Pandu went to them and
discussedwiththemandthereafter,accusedno.2Panducametohim
andtookthemoneypacketandgavetoonepersonoutofthem.Out
of those two persons, one person, he himself and accused no.1
MaheshcamebacktoAlapalliandtheycametohishouseandtook
somefoodandwentawaytobusstand.Assuchnothingisbrought
onrecordtodisbelievetheconfessionalstatementsmadebyaccused
no.1MaheshatExh.280andaccusedno.2PanduatExh.286.Hence,
inviewofjudgmentofApexCourtinthecaseof RamPrakash.v.
stateofPunjabreportedinAIR1959SupremeCourt1citedsupra,
theconfessionalstatementsmadebyaccusedno.1Maheshandno.2
Pandu can be taken into consideration against accused no.3 Hem
MishraalsounderSection30oftheEvidenceActasallaccusedare
triedjointly.

178] From the evidence of P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas, Judicial

MagistrateF.C.,Aheriitisprovedthataccusedno.1MaheshTirkiand
no.2 Pandu Narote voluntarily made confessional statements. The
confessional statements are corroborated by the evidence of P.W.9
RajuPoriyaAtramandfurtherfromtheevidenceofpanchwitness
P.W.1SantoshBawneseizureofincriminatingarticlesisprovedfrom
thepossessionof accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarote
andfromthecrossexaminationofwitnessescitedabovenothinghas
beenbroughtonrecordbythedefencetodisbelievetheirevidence
aboutthefactthataccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarote
havemadeconfessionalstatementsvoluntarilyandoutoftheirfree
willandwithoutpressureofpolice.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
129 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

179] Itisthedefenceoftheaccusedthataccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote were arrested at Ballarsha Railway
stationandnotatAheribusstand. Accordingtotheirdefenceon
21.8.2013accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNorotewere
notpresentinAheriPoliceStationandpolicefalselyimplicatedthem
inthiscase.InthisrespectthelearneddefenceAdvocateShriGadling
submittedthataccordingtoprosecutionfromtheinterrogationwith
accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote police came to
knowthataccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotehanded
over amount of Rs.5 lakhs through P.W.9 Raju Poriya Aram to the
member of banned organisation CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organisationRDFatBallarshaRailwaystationattheinstanceoflady
naxalNarmadakka.HesubmittedthatP.W.9RajuAtraminhiscross
examinationadmittedthatwhenhewascalledatAheriPoliceStation
on 21st August 2013, accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu
Narote were not present in Police Station, Aheri and the arrest
panchanamasofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteand
no.3HemMishrawereallegedtobeeffectedon22.8.2013.Itwas
argued,thisshowsthataccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2Pandu
Narotewerearrestedonearlierdateandfalsearrestpanchanamas
werepreparedshowingthataccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2Pandu
Naroteandno.3HemMishrawerearrestedon22.8.2013.

180] On going through the relevant portion of cross

examinationofP.W.9RajuAtramitisclearthatthiswitnesshasnot
specifically stated the date when police came to know from
interrogation of accused that he handed over Rs.5,00,000/ from
NarmaddakkaatBallarshaRailwaystation.Hehasnotgiventhedate
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
130 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

whenhecametoknowthisfactandhespecificallydeniedthatwhen
on21sthewasagaincalledinpolicestationatthattimeaccusedno.1
Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote were not present in police
stationwhichshowsthattill21sthewasnotknowingthisfact.From
thisitrevealsthataccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteand
no.3HemMishrawerearrestedon22.08.2013andapartfromthe
evidenceofprosecutionwitnessesi.e.theinformantP.W.6AtulAvhad
andPoliceInspectorP.W.10AnilBadgugjar,itgetscorroborationfrom
theconfessionalstatementofacccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2
Pandu Narote at Exh.280 and 286, wherein they stated that they
alongwithaccusedno.3 arrestedatsecludedplacenearAheriBus
Stand on 22.08.2013 and hence, the version of defence that the
accusedno.1to3werearrerstedon20.08.2013atBallarshaRailway
stationisnotacceptable.

181] Further,thefactofhandingoveramountofRs.5,00,000/
tothemembersofbannedorganizationatBallarshaRailwayStation
by accused no.2 Pandu Narote is corroborated by the evidence of
P.W.9 Raju Atram who stated in his examination that lady naxal
NarmadakkahandedoverRs.5,00,000/tohimandheattheinstance
ofladynaxalNarmadakkacarriedoutthesameatBallarshaRailway
Stationandhandedovertoaccusedno.2PanduNarotewhohadgave
the said amount of Rs.5,00,000/ to the members of banned
organizationwhocamefromDelhi.

182] Fromtheconfessionalstatementsofaccusedno.1Mahesh
TirkiandNo.2PanduNarote,itisclearthatattheinstanceofnaxal
ladyNarmadakkatheyhadbeentoRailwayStationBallarshafor34
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
131 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

times to receive the members of banned organisation to have

meetings with underground naxals and they were providing meals
and important things like torch etc. and further from their
confessionalstatementsitisclearthattheyhad comewithaccused
no.3HemMishratoAheriandtheywerearrestedatsecludedplace
nearAheribusstand.Thisactofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2
PanduNarotetakingaccusedno.3HemMishratohavemeetingwith
undergroundnaxalsNarmadakkashowsthattheyhaveassistedand
facilitatedhimwithintentiontofurthertheterrorist activities.The
statementonthepartofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2Pandu
Narote that they had been to Ballarsha Railwaystation for 3 to 4
times to receive the members of banned organisation to have a
meetingwithundergroundnaxalsandtheywereprovidingmealsand
importantthingsliketorchetc.andboththeaccusedstatedthaton
29.5.2013theyhadbeentoBallarshaRailwayStationandP.W.9Raju
AtramcametherealongwithamountofRs.5lakhswhichweregiven
bynaxalladyNarmadakkaforhandingoverthesametomembersof
bannedorganizationandatBallarshaRailwayStationaccusedno.2
PanduNarotetookthatamountfromP.W.9RajuAtramandhanded
overthesametothemembersofbannedorganizationwhohadcome
to Ballarsha Railway Station is an admission of guilt for offence
punishableundersection18,38and39ofUAPA.

Caseagainstaccusedno.6Saibaba

183] Inrespectofaccusedno.6Saibaba,itisthecaseofthe
prosecution that Investigating Officer P.W.11 SDPO Suhas Bawche
whileinterrogatingwithaccusedno.3HemMishraandaccusedno.4
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
132 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

PrashantRahicametoknowabouttheinvolvementofaccusedno.6
SaibabaandthereafterInvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche(P.W.21)
soughtpermissionfromJMFCAheriVyas(P.W.12)fortakinghouse
search of accused no.6 Saibaba at Delhi and after taking the
permissionhealongwithMaharashtrapolicewenttoDelhiandwith
thehelpofpolicestaffofMorisNagarPoliceStationofDelhiandin
presenceofpanchwitnessJagatBhole(P.W.2)searchofthehouseof
accused no.6 Saibaba was conducted and from his house search
extensive electronic gadgets CDs, DVDs, pendrives, memory cards,
harddisks (Art no.1 to 41) and other articles like magazine
Janapratirodh, one printout, photograph of lady naxal with gun,
bookbynamePrashembabuMaowadiNahiHain,bookletwithtitle
People's Hero Comrade Kishanji and one magazine The arrested
regarding banned organization CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organizationRDFwereseizedunderpanchanamaatExh.165dated
12/09/2013.

184] Thereafter Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche

depositedallthepropertiesseizedfromthehousesearchofaccused
no.6SaibabaintheMalkhanaofAheriPoliceStationwithMuddemal
ClerkGaneshRathod(P.W.13)videExh.276C&276Don13.09.2013.
On14.9.2013InvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawchetookoutsaid
property for investigation purpose and he opened and verified the
sameinpresenceofpanchP.W.4ShrikantGaddewarandagainsealed
under panchanama (Exh.202) and on the same day P.W.11 Suhas
Bawchesentthepropertyno.1to25(i.e.Articles1to41)toCFSL,
Mumbai through carrier P.W.5 Ravindra Kumbhare. On 22.09.2013
P.W.5RavindraKumbharebroughttwoharddiskcontaininghardsoft
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
133 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

copies from CFSL, Mumbai and panchanama to that effect was

preparedon23.09.2013atExh.204.

185] Further on 6.10.2013 P.W.5 Ravindra Kumbhare again

brought two harddisks containing softcopies and panchanama to
that effect was prepared on 7.10.2013 vide Exh.205 and both the
harddisks were brought by carrier P.W.5 Ravindra Kumbhare and
after receipt of both the harddisks and after viewing the mirror
images in soft copies of harddisks supplied by CFSL, Mumbai
printoutsofincriminatingdocumentsweretakenoutbyInvestigating
Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in presence of panch witness P.W.4
ShrikantGaddewarandthoseprintoutsweresenttoCFSL,Mumbai
forcertificationbyletterdated30.1.2014(Exh.263)whichwerefiled
alongwithchargesheet.Thereafter,fromCFSL,Bombay,Investigating
OfficerP.W.11SuhasBawchereceivedanalysisreport(Exh.267)dated
15.2.2014inrespectofEx.1to25(i.e.Articlesno.1to41)annexed
with certified hardcopies 247 pages containing incriminating text
material.

EVIDENCE

186] To prove the above allegations levelled against accused

No.6 Saibaba, prosecution has relied on the evidence of following
witnesses:

Sr. P.W. NameofWitness Exh.

No. No. No.
1] P.W.11 Suhas Prakash Bawche, SDPO, the 235
InvestigatingOfficer.
2] P.W.2 Jagat Bhole, the panch witness of the 164
panchanamainrespectofhousesearch
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
134 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

andseizureofmuddemalfromaccused
no.6Saibaba.
3] P.W.5 Ravindra Manohar Kumbhare, the PC 210
and carrier who carried and deposited
themuddemaltoCFSL,Mumbai.
4] P.W.15 Narendra Shitalprasad Dube, Station 308
DiaryDutyAmaldar.
5] P.W.21 BhaveshNikam,ScientificExpert. 371
6] P.W.7 Apeksha Kishor Ramteke, WPC, who 222
broughtmuddemalpropertyfromCFSL,
Mumbai.

187] Besides this, the prosecution relied on the following

documentstoprovetheallegationsagainstaccusedno.6Saibaba
1 Seizure panchanama dated 12.9.2013 in respect Exh.165
of electronic gadgets (Arts.1 to 41) CDs, DVDs,
pendrives, harddisks from the possession of
accusedno.6Saibaba
2 Letter dated 14.9.2013 to CFSL, Mumbai for Exh.212
analysisofelectronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)CDs,
DVDs, pendrives, harddisks from the house
searchofaccusedno.6Saibaba
3 Panchanama dated 23.09.2013 regarding the Exh.204
receipt of two harddisk containing hardcopies
fromCFSL,MumbaitoInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11
SuhasBawche
4 Panchanama dated 7.10.2013 regarding the Exh.205
receipt of mirror copies of electronic gadgets
(Arts.1to41)CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks
fromCFSL,MumbaitoInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11
SuhasBawche
5 Letterdated17.11.2013fromCFSL,Mumbaifor Exh.261
receipt of the mirrorimages of 16 GB memory
cardandelectronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)sentby
letterdated25.8.2013and14.9.2013respectively.
6 Letter dated 30.1.2014 to CFSL, Mumbai by Exh.263
Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche for
Certificationofhardcopies.
7 CFSL report Exh.267 alongwith certified pages
247
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
135 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

188] Suhas Prakash Bawche (P.W.11) isthe SDPO,Aheri and

theinvestigatingofficerinthiscase. Inhisexaminationinchiefat
Exh.235 he stated that during interrogation with accused no.4
PrashantRahiandno.3HemMishra,theinvolvementofaccusedno.6
Saibabawasrevealedandhence,hesoughtpermissionfromJMFC
AheriP.W.12NileshwarVyason492013fortakingthehousesearch
ofaccusedno.6Saibabaandaftergettingpermissionon792013,he
alongwith Addl.S.P.Mina,PIBadgujar,P.C.Kumbhare,H.C.Dubey
andotherpolicestaffleftforDelhion992013andhadtakenentry
Exh.275J in the station diary about the same and thereafter they
reachedatDelhion1292013.HeissuedletterExh.252toincharge
PoliceStationofficer,Morisnagarforprovidingpolicestaff,computer
expert and Videographer and thereafter the said Police Station
provided police staff tothem for conducting raid at the house of
accused no.6 Saibaba as he was residing in the campus of Delhi
University. Thereafter, he along with police, videographer, panch
witnessesandpolicestaffofDelhiproceededtothehouseofSaibaba
andafterreachingtothehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabatheyfound
hiswifeVasantawaspresentinthehouse. Sheopenedthedoorof
houseandtheygavetheirintroductionandexplainedthepurposeof
theirvisitattheirhouseandthereafter,shecalledaccusedSaibaba.
Hestatedthattheyshowedhousesearchwarrant tobothofthem
and obtained the signature of Saibaba and requested to cooperate
whiletakingthehousesearchofhishouseandorallyintimatedto
Saibabaandhiswifethattheycantakepersonalsearchofpoliceteam
andthepanchas,buttheyrefusedtotakethesearch.Thisfactisalso
mentioned in the panchanama of house search of accused No.6
SaibabaatExh.165.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
136 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

189] The Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche (P.W.11) stated

thatthentheyalongwithaccusedno.6Saibabaandhiswifeentered
the house and started taking search of the house of accused no.6
Saibabainpresenceofpanchasandcollectedincriminatingmaterial
i.e. CDs, DVDs which contained literature regarding Maoist and
Kashmirissueandthereafterseizedsomeharddisks,Pendrives,CDs,
laptop,mobile,memorycards,inalltotalsixCDs,twentyfourDVDs,
three pendrives, thirtytwo memorycards, five harddisks, one
laptop, one attached bluetooth suspected as a pendrive, three
mobiles, two SIM cards, documents relating naxal literature, i.e.
books, magazine, some printed material, one photograph of lady
naxal and some other articles. All these electronic devices were
sealedinplasticboxandlaptopwasseizedinseparatepacket,the
printedmatterandbooksweresealedinthreeseparatepacketsand
all three items were sealed with labels having his signature and
signaturesofpanchas.Thereafter,hepreparedpanchnama(Exh.165)
and copy of the same was given to accused no.6 Saibaba and his
signaturewasobtainedonit.

190] The Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche (P.W.11) along

withpoliceofficerswenttoMorisnagarPoliceStationandinformed
aboutthesearchofhouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaandgavecopyof
the panchanama Exh.165 to that Police Station. He identifiedthe
articlesseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibababefore
the Court. He further stated that the video recording of the
proceedingofthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabawastakenby
videographer provided by Morisnagar Police Station and while the
panchanama process was going on, the memory capacity of video
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
137 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

camerawasfullandatthattime,thePolicestaffaccompanyingwith
him have also made video recording of panchanama on their
respective mobile phonesanditwasstoredinthe computerafter
coming back and the same was saved in a folder and thereafter,
preparedtheCDofthesamefolder.

191] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel.Inhiscrossexaminationhehasadmittedthaton1292013
accusedno.6Saibabahadgivenonelettertohimwhenhehadbeen
to his house for house search and in the said letter accused no.6
Saibaba requested him that the search of his house should be
conductedinpresenceofprofessorsandhisadvocatesandinthesaid
letterhehaswrittenthathisrequestwasnotacceded.Hevoluntarily
stated that accused no.6 Saibaba had given the said letter after
completion of house search and drawing of panchanama. He
admittedthatwhentheoffenceispunishablemorethansevenyears
imprisonment,thesearchinrespectofthesameshouldbetakenin
presenceofGovernmentservantsandheknowsthatnormallyasper
DelhiUniversityActandCentralUniversityActthepermissionofVice
ChancellorisrequiredforthesearchinDelhiUniversityCampusand
inthepresentcasepermissionofViceChancellorwasnottaken.He
voluntarilystatedthatinthepresentcasewiththehelpofDelhilocal
policeallformalitieswerecompleted.

192] Headmittedthathe hadbeentoDelhiforfourtimesin

thepresentcasepriortofilingofchargesheetandvisitedMorisnagar
PoliceStationforfourtimeswhenhevisitedDelhiinrespectofthis
caseandhegaveremindertoMorisnagarPoliceStationregardingthe
searchcarriedoutinthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibaba.Headmitted
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
138 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

thatMorisnagarPoliceStationdidnotgiveCDofvideorecordingin
respectofsearchofhouseofSaibabaandMorisnagarPoliceStation
showeditsinabilitytogivetheCDonthegroundthatthepersonwho
had taken videography was not present there at that time andtill
filingofchargesheetnowrittencommunicationwasmadeinrespect
of getting the CD of said videography. He admitted that it is not
mentionedinthepanchnama thatthevideorecordingwasstopped
becausethestoragecapacityofmemorycardwasfullandhisofficers
haddonevideoshootingby theirmobilephones. Hevoluntarily
statedthattheentrytothateffectisinthecasediaryandafterthe
lapseofoneandhalfhourthevideographertoldhimthatthememory
ofSDcardwasfull,thushisofficerstookoutvideographyontheir
cellphonesasperthecapacityoftheirmobiles.

193] He admitted that Addl. S.P. Mina and himself came to

Nagpurbyplaneon1282013andthepropertywhichwasrecovered
fromthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabawasalsobroughtbyplaneto
NagpurandthentoAheribybus.Hehasadmittedthattheproperty
wrapped in the plastic box was handed over to muddemal Clerk
P.W.13GaneshRathodandtheplasticboxbeforethecourtisnotthe
sameinwhichpropertywasseizedfromthehouseofaccusedno.6
SaibababutthesaidplasticboxissimilartoArt.136beforethecourt.
He admitted that there is no mention in panchanama dated 129
2013and1492013andalsoinletteraddressedtoCFSLaboutDVD
allegedlyseizedfromthehouseofaccusedSaibabaandthereisno
mention in the panchanama that bluetooth / DVD writer was
attachedtothelaptopwhichwasallegedlyseizedfromthehouseof
accusedno.6Saibabaandafterreceiptoftheforensicreport,hecame
toknowthatpendrivewasinfactbluetoothandoneharddiscwas
DVDwriterand24CDSwereDVDs.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
139 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

194] Suhas(P.W.11)admittedthaton1292013and1492013
computerexpertswerepresentonboththeoccasionsandcomputer
experts did not tell him that unique identification number of
electronic device was to be mentioned in the panchanama. He
admittedthatthereisonewebsitefornaxalrelatedBannedThoughts
and all information regarding CPI (Maoist) and naxal literature,
meetings, centralcommitteeresolutionsisavailableonitandthere
arealsowebsitesonInternetregardingthenaxalliteratureandtheir
committee, meetings, resolutions etc. He admitted that he had
requested Morisnagar Police Station to procure witnesses for
panchanamawhichwastobeeffectedatthehouseofaccusedno.6
SaibabaandthereafterMorisnagarPoliceStationprocuredthepanch
P.W.2 Jagat Bhole and another panch. He admitted that it is not
mentionedinthepanchanamathatfromthedrawerofwoodentable
ofthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibaba,25to30CDS,laptop,45pen
drives,45harddiscsand56bookswerefoundanditisalsonot
mentionedinpanchanamathatpaperlabelsbearingthesignaturesof
panchasandpolicewereaffixedontheseizedarticles.

195] Suhas (P.W.11)deniedthatlettergivenbyaccusedno.6

Saibaba requesting him to take search of hishouse in presence of
ProfessorsandhisAdvocateswasnotfiledalongwithchargesheetas
itwasharmfultotheprosecution. Hedeniedthatasthesearchwas
notproperlycarriedouthence,permissionofViceChancellorwasnot
taken.Hedeniedthathisofficersdidnottakevideoshootingontheir
mobilesandthevideographerHarshavardhancarriedoutthewhole
videography of the proceeding of house search of accused no.6
Saibaba and he had given the CD of videography of the said
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
140 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

proceedingtohimandafterwatchingthesametheydidnotfindany
incriminating material against accused no.6 Saibaba and he found
theirofficersplantingharddisksandCDs/DVDsandpendrivesand
hence,thesaidCDwasnotfiledonrecord.Hedeniedthesuggestion
that the Article Nos.1 to 41 were not seized under panchnama at
Exh.165 from the house of accused no.6 Saibaba at Delhi and on
12.9.2013nothingwasseizedfromthehouseofSaibabaanditwas
notputinplasticbox.

196] He admitted that he has not mentioned unique

identificationnumberinthepanchanama. Hedeniedthatnothing
was seized from the house of accused no.6 Saibaba and false
panchanamawaspreparedbyhim.Hedeniedthatduringhistenure
at Aheri whatever literature wasfoundfromDens,wasshown as
recoveredfromthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

197] ThepanchwitnessJagatBhole(P.W.2)inhisexamination
inchiefatExh.136statedthaton1292013atabout245p.m.he
wascalledbyDelhiPoliceandhewastoldthattheywanttotake
searchofthehouseofProfessorSaibaba(accusedno.6Saibaba)inhis
presence. Hestatedthathewasknowingaccusedno.6Saibabaas
houseofaccusedno.6Saibabaissituatedbehindhisshopandthushe
wenttothehouseofaccusedno.6SaibabaalongwithDelhipolice.
WhenhereachedinthehouseofaccusedSaibaba,MaharashtraPolice
werealsopresentthereandpolicestartedtakingsearchofhouseof
accused Saibaba and the search proceedingwas recorded in Video
camera.Duringsearchwhenpoliceenteredinthebedroomofthe
houseofaccusedSaibaba,theyfound25to30CDs,laptop,4to5
pendrives,4to5harddisksand5to6booksinthedrawerofone
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
141 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

wooden table. Jagat (P.W.2) says police sealed all material in his
presenceanddrewthepanchanamatothateffectandhealongwith
anotherpanchRamkumarsignedonthepanchanama.Hestatedthat
in all 41 articles were seized from the bed room of the house of
accusedno.6Saibabaandpanchanamatothateffectwaspreparedat
Exh.165inhispresence.Hestatedthatwhenhewenttothehouseof
accused no.6 Saibaba for taking search of his house at that time
accusedno.6Saibaba,hiswifeandhisdaughterwerepresent. This
witness has also identified the articles seized from the house of
accusedno.6Saibaba.Thoseareasunder:

1] oneharddisk(Art.42)
2] oneharddiskonwhichitwaswrittenbufallowhichis
insidethewhiteenvelophavinglabeldated1492013
(Art.44)
3] onemoreharddiskdated1492013ofDellcompany
(Art.46)
4] oneblackcolouredharddiskonwhichMypassport
havingwhiteenvelopdated1492013iswritten(Art.48)
5] oneharddiskofCGatecompanyinwhitecoloured
envelop(Art.50)
6] CDcassettesofMoserbearcompanyonwhichconvention
ofJiten(Part1)(Art.52)
7] CDcassettesofMoserbearcompanyonwhichconvention
ofJiten(Part2)iswritteninwhitecolouredenvelop
dated1492013(Art.53)
8] CDofSonycompany,ononeCD(I)itiswritten
"ConventionagainstWaronpeople"(Art.55)
9] AnotherCDthereisonlyIIiswritten(Art.56)
10] CDIII(Art.57)
11] OneMoserbaerCDinoneenveloponwhichitiswritten
as"OnTrinamoolissueconventiononKishanjiNewDelhi
13.12.11(Art.59)
12] OneCDinwhiteenvelopwithtitle"Damagedprohibited
areaaFilmbySubratkumarSahu",(Art.61)
13] TwoCDsofMoserbaercompanyinwhiteenvelopon
whichitiswritten"conventiononKishanji(PartI)13
Dec.2011NewDelhi",(Art.63and64)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
142 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

14] OneCDofMoserbaeronwhichitiswrittenas"Combat
Lawconvertedbooks"inonewhitecolouredenvelop
(Art.66)
15]OneCDofSonycompanyinwhiteenveloponwhichitis
writtenas"ConferencebackAPMS2013,Dr.Ramdev
(Art.68)
16] OneCDofPUMAcompanyinoneenveloponwhichitis
writtenas"VideoonSriLankanWarCrimes(Art.70)
17] OneCDofSonycompanyinenveloponwhichitis
writtenas"LESALUTROUGE,Cy475/13(Art.72)
18] OneCDinCDbox,onCDboxitiswrittenas"AFew
Myths&FactsAboutSalwaJudumConcentration
Camps"andonCDitiswrittenas"AFewMythsand
FactsAboutSalwaJudumConcentrationCamps",CD
cover(Art.74)
19] OneCD(Art.75)
20] CDofMoserbaercompany,onno.1CD,itiswrittenas
"MeetingonKashmir21October2010NaitabSujataBha"
(Art.77)
21] CDofMoserbaercompany,onno.2CD,itiswrittenas
"MeetingonKashmir2,21October2010,V.V.N.Venuh,
(Art.78)
22] CDofMoserbaercompany,onNo.3itiswrittenas
"MeetingonKashmir3,21October2010,Gurusharan
Singhmessage,(Art.79)
23] CDofMoserbaercompany,onNo.4itiswrittenas
"MeetingonKashmir4,21October2010ArundhatiRoy
Amit Bhattacharayya"(Art.80),
24] CDofMoserbaercompany,onNo.5,itiswrittenas
"MeetingonKashmir521October2010Messagefrom
TyaguT.N.SheikhShaukat,(Art.81)
25] CDofMoserbaercompany,onNo.6,itiswrittenas
"meetingonKashmir6,21October2010SASDedani
(Art.82)
26] CDofMoserbaercompany,onNo.7itiswrittenas
"MeetingonKashmir7,21102010SASDedani(Art.83)
27] oneCDonwhichitiswrittenas"MatiKeLal"CD
(Art.85)
28] OneCDofCommandomakeonwhichitiswrittenas
"MaoistsinIndia"1592010(Art.87)
29] OneCDofSonycompanyonwhichitiswrittenas"BBC
DocumentaryonKASHMIR"(Art.89)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
143 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

30] OneCD(Art.91)
31] OneCD(Art.92)
32] OneCD(Art.93)
33] OneCD(Art.94)
34] OneCD(Art.95)
35] OneCD(Art.96)
36] Onependriveonwhichitiswrittenas"Simmtronics"
(Art.98)
37] OneblackcolouredpendriveofSonycompany(Art.100)
38] OnependriveofSandiskcompany(Art.102)
39] Memorycard(Art.104)
40] OneblacklaptopofSonycompany(Art.109)
41] OneanotherharddiskofToshibacompany(Art.111)
42] ThreebooksbynameJanpratirodh(Art.113)
43] redcolouredbook(Art.114)
44] Oneprintoutmaterialcontainingrevolutionary
democraticfrontdtd.7June2012(Art.115)
45] Onesketchofwomanwithdate762007(Art.116)
46] Pressstatementdated21stAugust,2013(Art.117)
47] onebookbynamePrasenbabuMawowadiNahiHai
(Art.118)
48] onebookofTelgulanguage(Art.119)
49] onebookletwithtitlePeople'sHeroComradeKishenji
(Art.120)
50] onemagazinewithtitle"Thearrested"Volume2
December2012(Art.121)
51] onemagazinePeople'sMarchdated882007(Art.122)
52] onephotographofwomanwithgun(Art.123)

198] WitnessJagat(P.W.2)wascrossexaminedbythelearned
defence counsel. In his crossexamination he admitted that Delhi
police had shown him search warrant when he was called for
panchanamaandcontentsofsearchwarrantwerereadovertohim.
HedeniedthatneitherDelhipolicenorMaharashtrapolicestatedhim
thattheyhadtotakesearchofhouseofaccusedno.6Saibabawhere
stolenpropertywaslyingandpolicedidnottellhimwhatwastobe
seizedfromthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibaba.Headmittedthatall
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
144 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

thelabelsontheenvelopescontainingthearticlesthereindonotbear
hissignature.Headmittedthathe doesnotknowthedatewhenhe
received the summons. He voluntarily stated that he received the
summon before 4 to 5 days of 2nd Januaryandon the same day
anotherpanchRamkumaralsoreceivedthesummonsandtheyboth
were called to attend the court for evidence. He admitted that
Maharashtrapolicehadcometohimtoservesummonsandthepolice
toldhimthatheshouldstartjourneyon2ndJanuaryandtoreach
Gadchiroliby3rdandafterreachingon3rdJanuaryatGadchirolihe
informed Maharashtra police and on 2nd January he himself and
secondpanchandDelhipoliceproceededforGadchirolibytrainin
the morning time. In reply to the question of defence counsel
Whether he had halted at police rest house?, he answered in
affirmative.

199] He admitted that he can not write the spelling of his

name,hedoesnothaveknowledgetowritethespellingofhisname
andcannotwriteandreadanylanguageexceptsignatureinEnglish
language. He admitted that when police requested him to act as
panchhetoldthemhecannotreadandwriteanylanguageandheis
illiterate and they should take another panch, however, police
requestedhimtoactasapanchinthepresentcase.Headmittedthat
inDelhiheresidesnearhisBarbershopsituatedinthecampusof
DelhiuniversityandinthecampusofDelhiUniversityseveralhostels
ofstudentsaresituatedandmorethan5000studentsresideinthe
said hostels and quarters of professors and other staff of Delhi
UniversityaresituatedinthecampusofDelhiuniversity.Headmitted
thatwhentheyhadgonetothehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaseveral
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
145 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

studentsandprofessorsweregatherednearthehouseofaccusedno.6
Saibabaandthatwhenthesearchofhouseofaccusedno.6Saibaba
was being taken accused no.6 Saibaba requested that the search
shouldbetakeninpresenceofprofessororhisadvocate.Headmitted
thatthepolicelockedthegateofthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibaiba
andtheydidnotallowanyprofessortoenterinthehouseofaccused
no.6Saibabaandprofessorswererequestingtopolicetowatchthe
proceedinginthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibababutthepolicedid
notallowthemtoenterinthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaand
insidethehouseofSaibabaaround20to25Delhipoliceand20to25
Maharashtrapolicewerepresent.

200] He admitted that the Delhi police were in uniform but

MaharashtrapolicewerenotinuniformandtwoMaharashtrapolice
were in uniform. He admitted that the police kept himself and
accused no.6 Saibaba out of the house and locked the door from
inside and there is only one door to the house of accused no.6
Saibaba.Headmittedthathedoesnotknowthedifferencebetween
C.D.andD.V.D.pendriveandbluetooth,C.D.driverandDVDdriver
andhedoesnotknowwhatismeantbyharddisk.Headmittedthat
whenthecontentsofthepanchanamawerereadovertohimbythe
policeatthattimepolicestatedhimthatinthedrawerofwooden
tablefromthehouseofSaibaba25to30CDs,laptop,4to5pen
drives,4to5harddisk,5to6bookswerefoundandthosearticles
wereseizedinhispresenceandhesignedonthepacketsofallthe
materialwhichwereseizedandhecannotassignanyreasonasto
whyitisnotmentionedinthepanchanama(Exh.165).
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
146 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

201] He denied that police told him that in the house of

accusedno.6Saibabastolenpropertywaslyingandtheyhadtotake
searchofthesame. Hedeniedthatonthedayofrecordingofhis
evidencehecameincourtalongwithpoliceandfrom3rdJanuary,
2016 he was in the custody of Gadchiroli police and they tutored
himthestatementwhichwastobegivenbeforethecourt.Hehas
deniedthathedidnotgotothehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabafor
searchofhishouse. He statedthattherewere threedoorstothe
houseofaccusedno.6Saibaba. Hehasdeniedthatpoliceobtained
hissignatureson3to4blankpapersandhewasnotpresentinthe
houseofprofessorSaibaba(accusedno.6Saibaba)forpanchanamaof
thesearchofhishouseandnothingwasseizedinhispresenceand
from2ndJanuaryhewaskidnappedbypolicetill16thJanuarypolice
threatened him to shut down his shop at Delhi University and
therefore,hedeposedfalselyaspertheirsay.Hehasdeniedthathe
sawArticlesNo.1to41mentionedinthepanchanama(Exh.165)for
thefirsttimeinthecourt.

Depositing of seized electronic gadgets Articles i.e. 16 GB

memorycardofSandiskcompanyandotherarticlesseizedfrom
thepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishraandArticlesno.1to
41 CDs, DVDs, pendrives, harddisks and other articles seized
fromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6SaibabainPoliceStation,
Aheri.

202] Afterseizureoftheabovemuddemalarticlesi.e.one16
GB memory card of Sandisk company and other articles i.e. cash
amountofRs.7,500/,KodakCamera,clothbag,whitecap,onespect
caseofblackcolour,onenewspaperofSaharadated1982013,one
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
147 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

red coloured towel, one blue coloured napkin, one shirt of checks
withlining,onegrayhalfpant,oneyellowcolouredTshirt,onedark
brownpant,onemoneypurse,pancard,twoidentitycardsofJNU
University, one SBI ATM card, one travel card ofDelhiMetro,one
DelhitoBallarshaRailwayticketdated19.8.2013andxeroxcopyof
election identity card i.e. Arts.21 to 38 seized from the personal
search of accused no.3 Hem Mishra under seizure panchanama
(Exh.137) and were deposited by PI Anil Badgujar (P.W.10) with
MuddemalClerkGaneshRathod(P.W.13)inMalkhanaofAheriPolice
Station.

203] ThepanchanamaofpersonalsearchofaccusedNo.3Hem
Mishrawaspreparedon22.08.2013andthearticlesseizedunderthe
panchanama were deposited with muddemal clerk (P.W.No.13)
GaneshRathod MalkhanainchargeofAheriPoliceStationtothat
effect there is a oral evidence of P.W.13 Ganesh Rathod about
depositingofsaidarticlesandrelevantcopyofentryinmuddemal
registerisproducedonrecordonExh.276Aandrelevantentryabout
thesameistakenon22.08.2013.

204] The electronic gadgets Articles nos.1 to 41 CDs, DVDs,

pendrives, harddisks and other articles i.e. magazine
Janapratirodh, one printout, photograph of lady naxal with gun,
bookbynamePrashembabuMaowadiNahiHain,bookletwithtitle
People's Hero Comrade Kishanji, one magazine The arrested
regarding banned organization CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organizationRDFintext,audioandvideo seizedduringthehouse
searchofaccusedno.6Saibabaunderseizurepanchanama(Exh.165)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
148 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

weredepositedon13.09.2013byInvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche
(P.W.11) with Ganesh Rathod (P.W.13), Muddemal Clerk of Aheri
PoliceStation.

205] To prove this aspect prosecution has examined Police

Officer Anil Badgujar (P.W.10), Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche
(P.W.11)andMuddemalClerkGaneshRathod(P.W.13).

206] In this respect, the Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche

(P.W.11) at Exh.235 stated that afterhousesearchofaccusedno.6
SaibabaatDelhion12.09.2013andhecametoAheriPoliceStation
on1392013an220]ddepositedallthepropertywhichwasseized
fromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6SaibabawithGaneshRathod
(P.W.13),MuddemalClerkofPoliceStation,AheriandGaneshRathod
(P.W.13)tookentryinstationdiaryofPoliceStation,Aheri.

207] Tothateffectthereisanentryinmuddemalregisterat
Exh.276D.

208] During crossexamination he admitted that property

wrappedintheplasticboxwashandedovertomuddemalclerkand
plasticboxbeforethecourtisnotthesameinwhichpropertywas
seizedfromthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibababutthesaidplasticbox
wassimilartoArt.136beforethecourt.Hedeniedthaton1282013
nothingwasseizedfromthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaanditwas
notputinplasticbox.

209] Muddemal Clerk of Aheri Police Station Ganesh Rathod

(P.W.13) in his examinationinchief at Exh.297 stated that in the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
149 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

month of August 2013 he was attached to Police Station Aheri as

Muddemal Moharir (Property Clerk) and on 2282013 Police
InspectorBadgujar(P.W.10)ofAheriPoliceStationdepositedproperty
of Crime no.3017/2013 in the Malkhana and he gave property
no.12/2013toitandtakennoteofpropertyinmuddemalregister
andcopyofthesaidregisterpageno.76isfiledonrecordatExh.276
A. On 2582013 the muddemal property i.e.16 GB memory card
seizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishrawassentto
CFSL,MumbaialongwithP.W.5PoliceConstableRavindraKumbhare,
B.no.2086andhehastakennoteofthesameonExh.276A.

210] Hestatedthaton1392013P.W.11SDPOSuhasBawche
depositedoneplasticboxinbrownpaperinsealedconditionandtwo
bigpacketsinbrownpaperinsealedconditioninthiscrimeandhe
gave property no.15/2013 to the same and took entry in property
register andagainon1492013SDPOSuhasBawche(P.W.11)had
takensaidpropertyforthepurposeofinvestigationandhehanded
overthepropertytoSDPOBawchevideentryinpropertyregisterat
Exh.276C. Hestatedthaton1492013afterdrawingpanchanama
P.W.11SDPOSuhasBawchedepositedthepropertyalongwithcopyof
panchanama consisting of 1 to 25 sealed packets and remaining
property and he had taken entry in respect of same in property
registerandgavepropertyno.16/2013tothesameandfurtheron14
92013 he handed over propertyno.1 to25to carrier P.W.5 Police
Constable Ravindra Kumbhare B.no.2086 depositing the same to
CFSL,Mumbaiandatthattime,PoliceInspectorBadgujar(P.W.10)
was also with him and on 1622014 Woman Police Constable
ApekshaRamteke(P.W.7)broughtsaidpropertyfromCFSLMumbaiin
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
150 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

45sealedpacketsanddepositedthesameinMalkhanaandhehad
taken note of the same in the register and he deposited all these
propertiesintheSessionsCourton13.10.2015videinvoiceslipat
Exh.135. He stated that on 1052013 P.W.11 SDPO Bawche
depositedonemobilephone,R.C.bookofvehicleandRs.320/with
him and thereafter he has taken an entry of property bearing
no.6/2014inthepropertyregistervideExh.276E.

211] ThiswitnessbroughttheoriginalregisterbeforetheCourt
andallthearticlesfiledinCourtwereverifiedfromtheoriginaland
foundtobecorrect.Hestatedthatinthiscrimeheissuedthereceipts
no.145,146,147(Exh.299/A,299/Band299/Crespectively)inhis
handwritingtotheconcernedofficerfordepositingthepropertywith
himandhehadwrittenthecontentsasperpanchanama.Inrespectof
propertydepositedwithhimvidepropertyno.13/2013,hehadissued
receiptsno.148and149(Exh.300/Aand300/B)totheinvestigating
officerandon1492013hegavereceiptsNo.150to158(Exh.300A
to300I)totheInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheinrespect
ofpropertyno.16/2013.

212] OnperusalofextractofMuddemalRegisteratExh.276Ait
reveals that there is entry at Sr.no.12 dated 22.8.2013 relating to
depositingofthepropertyseizedfromaccusedno.3HemMishraas
under:

i] amountRs.7700/,16GBSandiskmemorycard,Railwayticket
ofBallarshatoDelhidt.19.8.2013,ATMcardofSBI,pancard,
electioncard,IcardofJawaharlalNeharuUniversityetc.
ii] oneKodakcompanydigitalcamerawithcharger
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
151 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

iii] onebagcontainingclothes,speccover,whitecap,newspaperdt
19.8.2013 etc. In column no.11, it is mentioned that said
propertiesweredepositedon13.10.2015intheCourt.
Further,againentrydated2.9.2013atSr.no.13(Exh.276B)

213] There is entry dated 13.9.2013 at Exh.276C relating to

depositingofpropertyseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
Saibabawhichisdescribedasunder:

i] onesealedbox
ii] twobigsealedenvelopes.

214] There is entry at Exh.276D dated 14.9.2013 about

descriptionofpropertyseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
Saibabaasunder:

i]oneplasticboxinsealedcondition,
Articlesfromtwobigenvelopes:

1]SeagateS/N9VMGA22P500Gbytdharddisc.
2]Conventiononsitar.NewDelhidt.201211,C.D.'spartI&II
3]ConventionagainstWaronpeople,C.D.PartI,II,III
4]MatiKe Lal(BhartiyaKrantikariSambhavanaparek
Dastiwaz)120minutesC.D.

5]C.D.WhereonitiswrittenasTrinmulissueconventionon
Kishanjiissuedt.131211
6]C.D.CassetteProhibitedarea
7]ConventiononKishanji,dt.131211,C.D.CassettePartI&II
8]CombatLaw,convertedbooksC.D.Cassettes
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
152 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

9]CDwhereonitiswrittenasConferenceBookapms.2013
10]DadaStorageIECS/N7PF200CBYQ002YHarddisc.
11]MypassportS1WDBACX0010BBK01harddiscwithwire
usetoconnectlaptop.
12]BUFFALOharddisk.
13]harddiskno.SNNA53EZ4NofDELLCompany
14]RedblackishcolourSandisc32GBpendrive.
15]Onependrivehavingleathercoverbearingname
SimmtronicsGB
16]Blackcoloured16GBpendrivebearingnameSONY
17]Sandisc32GBmemorycard.
18]C.D.CassettecontainingheadingBBCDocumentaryon
Kashmir
19]C.D.CassettebearinglabelVideo'sonShrilankanwar
crimes
20]C.D.CassettebearingnameLEsaluterouge
21]C.D.CassettebearingnameTheinternationalassociationof
peopleslawyerpresentsfewmythsandfactsabout
SalwajudamConcentrationCamps.
22]C.D.Cassette1to7namedasmeetingonKashmir21Oct.
2010
23]C.D.CassettenamedasMaoistinIndia
24]SixC.D.Cassettes
25]LetterofJusticeK.Balkrishnan,chairpersonNational
HumanRightsCommission,Delhidated31July2012

215] Further, there is entry at Sr.no.6 dated 1.5.2014 at

Exh.276E about seizure of property belonging to accused no.6
Saibabawhichisasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
153 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1]RCbookofvehicle
2]Cash320/
3]Mobileblackcolourhavingwhitecoloursymbolofcutting
apple.

216] Further, it reveals from the muddemal register that

Muddemalnos.1to25werehandedovertoPCRavindraKumbhare
(P.W.5)fordepositingthesamewithCFSL,Mumbaiforanalysison
14.9.2013andWPCApekshaRamteke(P.W.7)broughtthemuddemal
from CFSL Mumbai and deposited the same through SDPO Aheri.
Some other property is also mentioned in the muddemal register
whichisasunder:

1]letterdated31July2012
2]Printedletterdated7June2012ofGreenhuntoperationof
RDF
3]15pageswrittenonPeopleHeroComradeKishanji
4]InformationbooknamedasThearrested
5]Peoplemarchdt8August2007
6]Bookletmagzine39and41,42
7]Printedtelgubook
8]Colourphotoofnaxal
9]BookletLalSalam
10]PrashenbabuMaowadiNahi
11]Telgumagzineetc.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
154 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Thereafter,asperorderofSessionsCourtGadchiroli,themuddemal
propertiesweredepositedon13.10.2015intheCourt.

217] P.W.13GaneshRathodwascrossexaminedbythelearned
defence counsel and in his crossexamination he admitted that he
cannotsaywithoutseeingregisterwhodepositedthepropertywith
himinwhichCrimenumberandifthenameoftheofficerinCrime
numberismentionedandon12.8.2013hemadelastentrypriorto
the entry in crime no.3017/2013 and from 12.8.2013 to 8.9.2013
thereareonlytwoentriesregardingtwocrimes.Headmittedthatin
theinvoicechallanitisnotmentionedthatpropertywassealedand
makeofthesealwasnotmentionedandhedidnotmake entryin
writingaboutthefactthattheclerkoftheDistrictcourtaskedhimto
openthesealwhiledepositingtheproperty.Headmittedthatthere
aresomeoverwritingsinthemuddemalregisterandthesaidover
writingsweremadebyhimattwoplacesandwhenthepropertywas
depositedinMalkhanaatthattime,itwassealedandmakeofthe
sealwasnotmentioned.Hewasshownmuddemalregisterandentry
dated26.8.2013whichisinhishandwritingandthenameofP.W.5
RavindraKumbharewaswrittenthereon.

218] Hedeniedthaton892013hemadeentryattheinstance
ofP.W.11SDPOShriBawcheandon2582013hedidnothandover
16GBmemorycardtoP.C.RavindraKumbhare(P.W.5)andthereafter
fromtimetotimehedidnothandoverthepropertytocarrierand
receivedthesameandalltheseentriesinMuddemalregisterwere
madeattheinstanceof P.W.11ShriBawcheandhedidnotmake
entryinwriting aboutthefactthattheclerkoftheDistrict court
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
155 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

askedhimtoopenthesealwhiledepositingtheproperty.Hefurther
deniedthatasthepropertywasnotinsealedconditionandmakeof
thesealwasnotmentioned,hencehedidnotmentionthesamein
muddemalregister.

ArgumentofSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathanaboutseizureofelectronic
gadgetsfromaccusedno.6Saibaba.

219] Inrespect ofaccused no.6Saibaba, thelearnedSpl.P.P.

Shri Sathainathan submitted that while interrogating with accused
no.3HemMishrainvolvementofaccusedno.6Saibabawasrevealed
andtothateffectCDRofmobileSIMofaccusedno.6Saibabawas
verified.FromtheCDRofmobileofaccusedNo.3andaccusedNo.4,
it revealed that accused no.3 HemMishra and no.4 Prashant Rahi
were in contact with accused no.6 Saibaba and their location was
foundatDelhiUniversity.Thereafter,applicationwasmovedbefore
theJudicialMagistrateF.C.,Aheri(P.W.12Vyas)andsearchwarrantat
Exh.244forcarryinghousesearchofaccusedNo.6SaibabaatDelhi
andheobtainedsearchwarrantatExh.244,thereafterInvestigating
Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche alongwith police team of Morisnagar
PoliceStationandMaharashtrapolicewenttothehouseofaccused
no.6Saibabaandcopyofsearchwarrantwasservedonaccusedno.6
Saibabaandhissignaturewasobtainedthereon.Searchwascarried
outasperprocedureandlegalformalitieswerefollowed.

SubmissionoflearnedAdvocateShriGadlingfortheaccusedin
respectofseizureofarticlesfromaccusedno.6Saibaba

220] Per contra, the learned Advocate Shri Gadling for the
accusedsubmittedthatpanchwitnessP.W.2JagatBholeinhiscross
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
156 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

examinationhasstatedthatduringsearchofthedrawerofwooden
tablekeptinthebedroomofthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibaba25to
30 CDs,laptop,45pendrive,4to5harddisk 5to6bookswere
seized,however,thisfactisnotstatedbyInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11
Suhas Bawche and further it isnot mentioned in the panchanama
(Exh.165). HesubmittedthatpanchwitnessJagatBhole(P.W.2)in
his cross examination stated that the contents of panchanama
(Exh.165)werereadovertohimwhenpanchanama(Exh.165)was
preparedbutthepanchanama(Exh.165)issilentaboutthefactthat
thecontentswerereadovertothiswitness.Hence,thepanchanama
whichwaspreparedatthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaisdifferent
thanthatofpanchanama(Exh.165). HesubmittedthatP.W.2inhis
crossexaminationadmittedthatwhenthesearchofhouseofaccused
No.6 Saibaba was carried out, accused Saibaba and himself were
outsidethehome.

221] HesubmittedthatpanchwitnessP.W.2JagatBholeinhis
examinationstatedthatpolicesealedallmaterialinhispresenceand
drewpanchanamatothateffectandhesignedonthepanchanama
howeverinhiscrossexaminationheadmittedthatthelabelsonthe
articlesdonotbearhissignaturesthatmeansthepropertyproduced
beforetheCourtisnotthesamepropertywhichwasseizedfromthe
houseofaccusedno.6Saibabaanditisplantedone. Hesubmitted
thatP.W.4ShrikantGaddewarinhisexaminationinchiefstatedthat
the property seized from the house of accused no.6 Saibaba was
openedforsendingittoCFSLandpolicebroughtoneplasticboxand
twosealedpaperpacketsandthoseweresealedandtheybearhis
signatures.Shrikant(P.W.4)hasnotstatedthattherewasearlierseal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
157 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

havingsignaturesofpanchP.W.2JagatBhole.Shrikant(P.W.4)stated
thatthelabelsbearthe220]signaturesofP.W.2JagatBhole. Itwas
arguedthatthisshowspropertywasnotsealedwhenseizedfromthe
housesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

222] HesubmittedthatafterperusalofevidenceofP.W.2Jagat
Bholeitrevealsthathewasnotabletopointoutanysealbearing
date12.9.2013andonlystatedhavinglabeldated14.9.2013onthe
envelopes and in crossexamination he admitted that he does not
knowdifferencebetweenCDandDVD,pendriveandbluetooth,CD
driverandDVDdriverandharddisk.Hence,itwasarguedthathis
evidenceisnotworthtobereliedupon.

223] HesubmittedthatP.W.2JagatBholeidentifiedtheplastic
boxwhichismarkedatArticle107whichwasusedatthetimeof
seizureofarticles,however,accordingtoprosecutionwitnessP.W.15
NarendraDubeyandP.W.5RavindraKumbharewhentheyhadbeen
toCFSLtheyputallarticlesinanotherboxwhichisdifferentfrom
Article107.However,itisnotmentionedinthepanchanamathatthe
property was deposited in plastic box andfurther P.W. 4 Shrikant
admitted in crossexamination that plastic box which is before the
CourtwasnotbroughtbeforehimatPoliceStationandallarticles
wereputinhardboardboxandthereisnohardboardboxbeforethe
Court.

224] He submittedthat P.W.2 Jagat Bhole in his examination

statedthatallarticleswereinplasticbox. Hencethereisinterse
contradiction between the evidence of both the witnesses about
hardboardboxandplasticbox. Thisshowsthatthepropertywhich
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
158 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

was opened before P.W.4 Shrikant was different and there is no

hardboard box before the Court. He submitted that unique
identification number of electronic gadgets were not mentioned in
panchanamaandnosealandsignaturesareappearingonthelabels.
Hence,itwasarguedthatpropertywhichwassenttoCFSLwasnot
the property which was seized from the house of accused no.6
Saibabaon12.9.2013.HesubmittedthatfurtherwitnessJagat(P.W.2)
has admitted in his crossexamination that accused no.6 Saibaba
made a request to police officer to take search in presence of
ProfessorsandAdvocates,andthatInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11Suhas
Bawchepurposefullytookhimwhoisanilliteratepersontoactasa
panch.ThisshowsthattheywantedtoplantelectronicgadgetsArt.1
to 41 like CDs, DVDs, pendrives, harddisks etc. by showing that
thosepropertieswereseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6.
HefurthersubmittedthatP.W.11SuhasBawcheshouldhavetaken
theGovernmentservantasapanch,however,hepurposefullytook
Jagat(P.W.2)aspanchwitness.Hefurthersubmittedthatpermission
oftheViceChancellorwasnottakenforhousesearchofaccusedno.6
Saibaba.

225] He submitted that from the evidence of panch witness

P.W.2JagatBholeitrevealsthathewashidinghisstayatGadchiroli
and from his admission in crossexamination that he haltedat the
shelterofpolice.Thisshowsthatheisunderthethumbofpoliceand
he is tutored witness. According to prosecution he is an illiterate
witnessandhecannotreadandwriteandhecanonlysigninEnglish
language and he requested the police to take another panch but
policeaskedhimtoactasapanch.

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
159 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

226] HesubmittedthatP.W.11SuhasBawcheadmittedinhis
crossexaminationthatvideographyoftheproceedingofhousesearch
ofaccusedno.6SaibabawastakenbutneitherCDofthesamenor
videographerwasexaminedtoprovethefactthatvideographywas
doneandInvestigatingofficerP.W.11SuhasBawchehasnotmade
anyefforttogettheC.D.fromtheDelhipoliceandtheexplanation
givenbytheinvestigatingofficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheisnotproper
andhence,adverseinferenceshouldbedrawnagainsttheprosecution
fornonproductionofCDandnonexaminationofvideographer.In
supportinhissubmissionheplacedrelianceonthejudgmentofApex
CourtTomasoBruno&Anr.VrsStateofU.P.,reportedin2015(1)
Crimes105(SC),whereinApexCourtobservedthat

(b)CriminaltrialCircumstantialevidenceNon
Production of CCTV footage, noncollection of call
records(details)andsimdetailsofmobile phones
seized from the accused Not mere faulty
investigation Amounts to withholding of best
evidence Section 114(g) Indian Evidence Act,
1972 Adverse inference may be drawn against
prosecutionfornotproducingtheaforesaiddetails
particularly CCTV footage while it could
Prosecutionneitherexaminingthedoctordeclaring
thedeceased'broughtdead'norproducingthereport
thatwaspreparedintheemergencywardofhospital
Notproducingdeathintimationsenttothepolice.
(Para27,29,30)

ConclusiononthepointofSeizureofarticlesfromhousesearch
ofaccusedno.6Saibaba

227] On the point of seizure of electronic gadgets like CDs,

DVDs,pendrives,harddisks,laptop(Articlesno.1to41)fromthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
160 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

housesearchofaccusedno.6SaibabaatDelhi,theprosecutionhas
reliedontheevidenceofP.W.no.2JagatBholeandP.W.no.11Suhas
Bawche. TheevidenceofP.W.no.2JagatBholeischallengedonthe
groundthathewasnotpresentatthetimeofhousesearchofaccused
no.6Saibabaandthatthedefencereliedontheadmissiongivenby
thiswitnessincrossexaminationthatwhiletakingthehousesearch
ofaccusedno.6Saibabaheandaccusedno.6Saibabawerekeptout
ofthehouseandthereafterpolicetoldhimthatfromthedrawerof
woodentablefromthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibaba25to30CDs,
laptop,4to5pendrives,4to5harddisk,5to6bookswerefound
andthosearticleswereseizedinhispresenceandhesignedonallthe
materialwhichwereseizedontheirpacket.Theomissioninrespect
of number of CDs, DVD, Pendrives found in the house search of
accusedno.6Saibabawasbroughtonrecord.Furtherthesearticles
werenotsealedwhentheywereseized.

228] Itiswellsettledprincipleoflawthatwhileappreciating
the evidence of witness the whole evidence of witness i.e.
examinationinchiefandcrossexaminationistobeconsideredanda
stray admission given by witness in crossexamination cannot be
considered.Atthisjuncture,itisnecessarytoconsidertheratiolaid
downbyKarnatakaHighCourtincaseofB.A.BuddabaiVs.Stateof
Karnataka reported in Criminal Appeal No.62 of 2007. In the
abovecaseaccusedattemptedthemurderbyfiringthreebulletsby
gun. Ballistic report states that after firing one pellet, gun was
refilled. However,witnessgaveadmissioninhiscrossexamination
thataccuseddidnotrefillthegun. Itwasobservedthatmerestray
admissionthatthegunwasnotrefilledatthetimeofsecondgunshot
isnotagroundtodiscardtheversionofBallisticExpert.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
161 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

229] Inviewoftheaboveinthepresentcase,wehavetosee
whether the panch witness Jagat Bhole (P.W.2) was present at the
timeofpanchanamaornot.Duringhiscrossexaminationheadmitted
thatatthetimeofhousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba,hewaskept
outside, however, in his examination he stated that at the time of
house search of accused no.6 Saibaba, he was present and his
signaturewastakenonseizurepanchanama(Exh.165). Itistobe
notedthatP.W.2JagatBholeisilliteratewitnessandhecanonlysign
inEnglishlanguageandhiscrossexaminationwasconductedfora
whole day. In examinationinchief he narrated that all the facts
howthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabawastaken.Hestated
thatwhiletakingsearchbypolicetheyenteredinthebedroomof
accusedSaibabaandinthedrawerofonewoodentable25to30CDs,
laptop,45pendrives,4to5harddisks,5to6bookswerefoundand
policesealedallmaterialinhispresenceanddrewthepanchanamato
thateffectandhealongwithanotherpanchRamkumarsignedonthe
panchanama. Hestatedthatinall41articleswereseizedfromthe
bedroomofthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaandpanchanamato
thateffectwaspreparedatExh.165inhispresence. Hestatedthat
whenhewenttothehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabafortakingsearch
of his house at that time accused no.6 Saibaba, his wife and his
daughterwerepresent. Ongoingthroughtheexaminationinchief
andcrossexaminationofP.W.2JagatBhole,itisclearthatthiswitness
had made two inconsistent statement at different stages of the
proceedingsi.e.inexaminationinchiefhestatedthatheenteredin
the bed room of Saibaba alongwith police and from drawer of
woodentable25to30CDs,laptop,45pendrives,4to5harddisks,
5to6bookswerefoundandpolicesealedallmaterialinhispresence
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
162 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

anddrewthepanchanamatothateffect. But,incrossexamination
headmittedthatheandaccusedno.6Saibabawerekeptoutofthe
houseandpolicesaidthattheyrecovered25to30CDs,laptop,4to
5pe220]ndrives,4to5harddisk,5to6booksfromthedrawerof
wooden table from the house of accused no.6 Saibaba. At this
juncture,itisnecessarytoconsiderratiolaiddownbyApexCourtin
thecaseof SurajmalVrsState,reportedin1979SupremeCourt,
1408,citedsupra,whereinitisobservedthat

(A)CriminalP.C.(2of1974),S.354Appreciation
of evidence Two inconsistent statements by
witnessatoneortwostagesCredibility. Where
witnessesmaketwoinconsistentstatementsintheir
evidence either at one stage or at two stages,the
testimony of such witness becomes unreliable and
unworthyofcredenceandintheabsenceofspecial
circumstances no conviction can be based on the
evidenceofsuchwitnesses.

230] Itistobenotedthatthiswitnessisilliteratewitness.He
cannot read and write English language and his crossexamination
washeldinwholedaythattoobyeminentlawyerhavingstanding
practiceofmorethan25yearsandthiswitnessmighthavefrightened
because of Court atmosphere, hence in view of judgment of Apex
Court,inthecaseofSurajmalVrsState,reportedin1979Supreme
Court, 1408, cited supra, the above circumstances could be
considered asspecialcircumstancestobelievehisevidenceofP.W.2
JagatBholeanditcanbeinferredthatP.W.2JagatBholewaspresent
at the time of house search of accused no.6 and at the time of
preparation of panchanama (Exh.165) and hence stray admission
given by P.W.2 Jagat Bhole that heandaccusedno.6Saibabakept
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
163 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

outsidethehousewhiletakinghousesearchofthehouseofaccused
no.6Saibaba,isnotagroundtodiscardtheversionofP.W.2Jagat
Bhole.

231] It has come on record that the copy of panchanama of

housesearchofhouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaregardingseizureof
electronic gadgets (Articlesno.1 to41) wasgiven to accused no.6
Saibabaandhissignaturewasobtainedonthecopyofpanchanama
andthishasnotbeendisputedbythedefence.Tothateffectthereis
evidence of Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche. From his
evidence, it is clearly established that before taking the search of
houseofaccusedno.6Saibabahehadobtainedsearchwarrantfrom
J.M.F.C., Aheri vide Exhibit No.244 and thereafter he went to the
houseofaccusedno.6SaibabaalongwithotherpolicestafftoDelhi
and with the help of police of Moris Nagar Police Station he
conductedhousesearchofaccusedno.6SaibabainpresenceofP.W.2
JagatBholeandseizedelectronicarticlesNo.1to41fromhishouse
and before taking of house search of accused Saibaba, the police
officersofferedtheirpersonalsearchtobetakenbyhiswife,butthey
refusedforthesameandthisfacthasbeenmentionedinpanchanama
atExh.165.EvenassumingforthesakeofargumentthatpanchP.W.2
JagatBholeandaccusedno.6Saibabawerekeptoutsidethehouse
butfromtheevidenceofPW.11SuhasBawcheithascomeonrecord
that at the time of housesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba,accused
no.6SaibabaandhiswifeVasanthawerepresent.

232] Evenassumingforsakeofargumentmerelybecausethere
hasbeensomeirregularitiesatthetimeoftakingsearchofhouseof
accused no.6 Saibabathatisnotagroundtodiscardtheevidence
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
164 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

collected duringsuchsearchandatthisjunctureitisnecessaryto
considerratiolaiddownbytheApexCourtinthecaseof Stateof
Haryana vs. Rajmal and another (2011)
Supreme Court Cases
326 reportedinSupremeCourtCases(Cri)1328whereinitisheld
that

D.CriminalTrialSearchandseizureIllegality
ofsearchprocedureEffectofIllegalsearchdoes
notvitiateseizureofarticlesRequirementoflawin
suchcasesisthatCourthastoexaminecarefullythe
evidence regarding seizure, and beyond this no
further consequences ensue Held, thus no error
committed by courts below by proceeding on
materialcollectedasaresultofseizureofmaterials
Animals, birds and fish Punjab Prohibition of
CowSlaughterAct,1955(15of1956)Ss.3and8
CriminalProcedureCode,1973,Ss.100and102.
(paras17and18)

233] Thedefencehasattackedonthegroundthatatthetime
ofhousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabavideographerwasprovided
andvideographyofthesaidproceedingwasdoneandthereafterCD
was prepared to that effect. However videographer was not
examinedandCDwasalsonotproducedonrecord. Henceadverse
inferenceistobedrawnagainsttheprosecution. Insupportofhis
submissionthedefencereliedonthefollowingJudgments

[ii] Tomaso Bruno vs. State of U.P. reported in 2015 (1)

Crimes105(SC),whereinitisheldthat

(b) Criminal trial Circumstantial evidence

NonproductionofCCTVfootage,noncollectionof
call record (details) and sim details of mobile
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
165 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

phonesseizedfromtheaccusedNotmerefaulty
investigation Amounts to withholding of best
evidence Section 114(g) Indian Evidence Act,
1972 Adverse inference may be drawn against
prosecutionfornotproducingtheaforesaiddetails
particularly CCTV footage while it could
Prosecutionneitherexaminingthedoctordeclaring
the deceased 'brought dead' nor producing the
reportthatwaspreparedintheemergencywardof
thehospitalNotproducingdeathintimationsent
tothepolice.(Para27,29,30)

[iii] Shri Balkrishna Bhau Desai vs. The State of

Maharashtrareportedin2016ALLMR(Cri)1913,whereinitis
observedthat

(C) Prevention of Corruption Act (1988), Ss.7,

13(2), 13(1)(d) Evidence of trap Non
productionoftaperecorderusedintrapEffect
Evidenceofcomplainantthatconversationbetween
him and accused was not only recorded, but also
heardbyIOandpanchasafterthetrapwasover
Whereas IO denied any such recording Adverse
inferencemaybedrawnthatrecordedconversation,
if produced, would not have supported the
prosecution case Approach of trial court while
proceeding on possibility that conversation might
not have been recorded due to some mechanical
defect,orthatitwouldnothavebeenaudible,even
thoughnobodyputacasetothateffect,iserroneous
approachHeld,thisisseriousinfirmitywhichby
itself, is sufficient to raise doubt on case of
prosecution.(Paras17,18,20,26)

234] Itiswellsettledthatwhileconsideringratiodecidendiof
thecasethefactualaspectunderwhichtheobservationsaremadeis
tobeconsidered.Atthisstageitisnecessarytoconsidertheratiolaid
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
166 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

down in the Judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of

PadmasundaraRao(Dead)andothersvStateofT.N.andothers
reportedinAIR2002SupremeCourt1334whereinitisheldthat
(A) Interpretation of Statutes Precedents
RelianceondecisionsCannotbeplacedwithout
discussing fact situation of decision relied on.
Courts should not place reliance on decisions
without discussing as to how the factual situation
fits in with the fact situation of the decision on
which reliance isplaced. There isalwaysperilin
treating the words of a speech or judgment as
though they are words in a legislative enactment
anditistoberememberedthatjudicialutterances
aremadeinthesettingofthefactsofaparticular
case. Circumstantial flexibility, one additional or
different fact may make a world of difference
betweenconclusionsintwocases.

235] FurtherincaseofRameshSinghaliasPhottiv.Stateof
A.P. reported in AIR 2004 Supreme Court 4545 the Apex Court
observedthat

(B)PrecedentEarliercase Canbetreatedas
precedent only if facts and circumstances in such
earlier cited case is in pari materia in all respects
withfactsandcircumstancesofcaseinhand.(Para
11)

236] Atthisjuncture,itisnecessarytoconsiderratiolaid
downbytheApexCourtinthecaseof AjayKumarSinghvs
FlagOfficer, CommandingInChiefandothers reportedin
AIR2016SupremeCourt3528whereinitisobservedthat
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
167 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

IndianPenalCode(45of1860)S.391EvidenceAct
(1 of 1872), S. 45 Robbery Expert evidence Chance
fingerprints lifted from entrance glass doors of bank Non
examination of photographer Also nonproduction of
negatives of photographs of chance fingerprints Said lapse
cannotresultinacquittalofaccusedCriminaltrialsshouldnot
bemadecasualtyforsuchlapsesininvestigationorprosecution.
CriminalP.C.(2of1974),S.156.(Para17)

237] In the above case accused was charged for offence

punishableundersection392and342andduringinvestigationthe
photographofaccusedwastakenandnegativesofphotographwere
alsoavailableandstatementofphotographerwasalsorecorded,but
duringthetrialthephotographerwasnotexamined.Thephotograph
andnegativeswerealsonotproducedandinthatsituationtheApex
Court observed that the said lapses cannot result in acquittal of
accused. On going through the Judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court
reliedbydefenceTomasoBrunovs.StateofU.P.reportedin2015
(1)Crimes105(SC)citedsupraitseemsthatCCTVfootagewasnot
collectedduringinvestigation.However,thefactsofthepresentcase
are identical with the facts of Ajay Kumar Singh vs Flag Officer,
CommandingInChiefandothers reportedin AIR2016Supreme
Court3528,henceasdiscussedaboveratiolaiddownbyApexCourt
inthecaseofAjaykumarsinghwouldbeapplicabletothepresent
case.Hence,merelybecausevideographerwasnotexaminedandCD
wasnotproducedonrecord,isnotagroundtorejectthetestimonyof
investigating officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche. When he has given
explanation that while videographing the proceeding of search of
houseofaccusedno.6Saibababythevideographer,thememoriesof
thevideocamerawasfull,henceitcouldnotbeproduced.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
168 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

238] ButInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawchestatedthat
thePolicestaffaccompaniedwithhimhavealsomadevideorecording
ofproceedingofpanchanamaontheirrespectivemobilephonesand
it was stored in the computer after coming back to Aheri Police
Stationandthesamewassavedinafolderandthereafter,prepared
the CD of the same folder and he submitted the same before the
Court. ItisatArt.144. AsthesaidCDisnotaccompaniedbythe
certificateasrequiredundersection65BofIndianEvidenceAct,it
cannotbetakenintoconsideration.

239] Themaindefenceofaccusedno.6Saibabaisthatseizure
of all alleged electronic gadgets i.e. CDs, DVDs, pendrives, hard
disks, memorycards (Arts.No. 1 to 41) from the house search of
accusedno.6SaibabavidepanchanamaExh.165isfalse,fabricated
andmanipulatedandthesuggestionsweregiventotheInvestigating
Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche that the electronic gadgets i.e. CDs,
DVDs,pendrives,harddisks,memorycards(Arts.No.1to41)were
takenoutfromthedensandmanipulatedandshowntoberecovered
from the house of accused no.6 Saibaba. In support of his
submissionheplacedrelianceonthefollowingjudgments:

[i] Yusufalli Esmail Nagree vs. The State of Maharashtra

reportedinAIR1968SupremeCourt147,whereinitisheldthat
(A) Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S.6, S.8, S.7
OffenceunderS.165APenalCodeEvidenceTrap
laid Conversation between accused and
complainanttaperecordedAmounthandedoverto
complainant Voices of complainant and accused
identified Contemporaneous dialogue between
them held formed part of res gestae and was
relevantunderS.8Further,likeaphotographofa
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
169 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

relevantincidentacontemporaneoustaperecordof
a relevant conversation was admissible under S.7.
Caselawrelied(Para5)

[ii] MahabirPrasadVerma.vs.Dr.SurinderKaurreported
inAIR1982SupremeCourt1043,whereinitisheldthat
(A)EvidenceAct(1of1872),S.63Taperecorded
conversationCredibilityCanbereliedononlyas
corroborativeevidence.(Taperecordedconversation
Credibility).

[iii] Tukaram S. Dighole vs. Manikrao Shivaji Kokate

reportedin(2010)4SupremeCourtCases329,whereinitisheld
that
B. EvidenceAct,1872Ss.3,61to65,74
and75Contentsofaudio/videocassetteNature
of proof Mere production of an audio cassette,
assumingthatthesamewasacertifiedcopyissued
by Election Commission Held, tape records of
speechesaredocumentsasdefinedinS.3ofthe
EvidenceActandstandonnodifferentfootingthan
photographsAudioandvideotapetechnologyhas
emergedasapowerfulmediumthroughwhichfirst
hand information about an event can be gathered
andinagivensituationmayprovetobeacrucial
pieceofevidenceHowever,withfastdevelopment
in electronic techniques, tapes/cassettes are more
susceptible to tampering and alterations by
transposition,excision,etc.whichmaybedifficultto
detect and therefore, such evidence has to be
receivedwithcautionToruleoutpossibilityofany
kindoftamperingwithtape,standardascompared
to other documentary evidence Held, appellant
miserablyfailedtoproveauthenticityofcassetteas
well as accuracyofspeechespurportedlymade by
respondentAdmittedly,appellantdidnotleadany
evidencetoprovethatcassetteproducedonrecord
was a true reproduction of original speeches by
respondentorhisagentThus,appellantfailedto
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
170 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

prove that respondent was guilty of indulging in

corrupt practices Criminal Trial Proof
Electronicevidence/Taperecords.(Paras23to27)

240] It is important to note that from the evidence of

Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche it is clear that during
interrogationwithaccusedno.3HemMishraandno.4PrashantRahi
involvement of accused no.6 Saibaba was revealed and hence he
soughtpermission from JMFCAheriP.W.12NileshwarVyason49
2013fortakingthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaandafter
gettingpermissionon792013,healongwith Addl.S.P.Mina,PI
Badgujar,P.C.Kumbhare,H.C.Dubeyandotherpolicestaffleftfor
Delhion992013andhadtakenentryExh.275Jinthestationdiary
aboutthesameandthereafteron1292013heissuedletterExh.252
to incharge Police Station officer, Morisnagar for providing police
staff,computerexpertandVideographerandthereafterthesaidPolice
Stationprovidedpolicestafftothemforconductingraidatthehouse
ofaccusedno.6SaibabaashewasresidinginthecampusofDelhi
University.

241] Thereafter, Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche

alongwith his police staff, videographer, panch and police staff of
DelhiproceededtothehouseofSaibaba andafterreachingtothe
house of accused no.6 Saibaba they found his wife Vasanta was
presentinthehouseandsheopenedthedoorofhouseandtheygave
theirintroductionandthepurposeoftheirvisitattheirhouseand
thereafter, she called accused no.6 Saibaba. He stated that they
showed the copy of house search warrant to both of them and
obtainedthesignatureofSaibabaandrequestedtocooperatewhile
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
171 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

takingthehousesearchofhishouseandorallyintimatedtoaccused
no.6 Saibaba and his wife that they could take personal search of
themselvesandthepanchasandtheaccusedno.6Saibabaandhis
wife Vasanta declined to the same and this fact is mentioned in
panchanama at Exh.165 and then they along with accused no.6
Saibabaandhiswifeenteredthehouseandstartedtakingthesearch
of his house in presence of panchas and seized electronic gadgets
Arts.1to41,threemobiles,twoSIMcards,books,magazineandsome
otherarticlesandpanchnama(Exh.165)ofhousesearchandseizure
wascarriedoutinpresenceofpanchwitnessP.W.2JagatBholeandall
the properties were sealed with labels and signatures of P.W.2 and
P.W.11 Suhas Bawche copyofpanchanama,the same wasgivento
accusedno.6Saibaba.

242] After seizure and sealing of said articles Investigating

OfficerP.W.11SuhasBawche and other police staff came to Aheri
PoliceStationbyaeroplaneandon1392013depositedtheproperty
withtheMuddemalclerkinAheriPoliceStationinsealedcondition
and to that effect there is entry in the muddemal register at
Exh.276C.Ongoingthroughtheaboveevidenceitisclearthatthere
isnoreasontodisbelievetheversionofInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11
SuhasBawcheandpanchwitnessP.W.2JagatBholethaton12.9.2013
house search of house of accused no.6 Saibaba was taken and
electronicdataCDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks,laptops(Arts.1to
41),threemobiles,twoSIMcards,books,magazine,naxalliterature
andsomeotherarticleswereseizedunderhousesearchpanchanama
Exh.165 and defence of the accused that those articles were
manipulatedandfabricatedisnotreliable. Furtherithascomeon
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
172 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

recordthatafterdrawingpanchanamacopyofthepanchanamawas
alsogiventoaccusedno.6Saibabaandhissignaturewasobtained
thereonandExh.165bearshissignature. Thisshowsthatpanchanama
Exh.165wascarriedoutatthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

243] Itisimportanttonotethattheelectronicdatacontained
inelectronicgadgetslikeCDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks,(Arts.No.
1 to 41) is around 3 TB. Had the police officer manipulated or
fabricated the said electronic data in CDs, DVDs, pendrives, hard
disks (Art.nos.1 to 41), they would have inserted (by way of
fabricationormanipulation)onlyincriminatingmaterialandnotthe
dataormaterialrelatingtothepersonalcorrespondenceofaccused
no.6Saibabaandfamily photographsofaccusedno.6Saibabaand
HindisongsinaudioandvideoformandEnglishandHindimovies
around100innumbers.

244] Further had the police fabricated and manipulated the

electronicdatainCDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks(Art.nos.1to41)
theywouldnothaveprotectedthetextfilewithpasswordanddeleted
thefilesfromtheharddisksseizedfromthehousesearchofaccused
no.6Saibaba.Further,itisthecontentionofthedefencethatthesaid
electronicgadgetsCDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks(Art.nos.1to41)
bear unique identification numbers which were not mentioned in
panchanama (Exh.165) when those gadgets were seized. It is
importanttonoteherethatoncarefulperusalofthesaidelectronic
gadgetsCDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks(Art.nos.1to41)unique
identificationnumberisnotvisible.Besides,inviewoftheanswerof
ScientificExpertP.W.21BhaveshNikamtothecourtquestionthathe
didnotfindanychange,alterationortamperinginoriginalexistence
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
173 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

offilecontainedinelectronicgadgetsCDs,DVDs,pendrives,hard
disks (Art.nos.1 to 41) and 16 GB memory card seized from the
possession of accused No.3 Hem Mishra, the non mentioning of
uniqueidentificationnumberofelectronicgadgetsinpanchanamasis
notfataltoprosecutioncase.

245] The defence further attacked on the evidence of

prosecution witnesses on the point that before carrying out house
search of house of accused no.6 Saibaba the permission of Vice
chancellorofDelhiUniversitywasnottakenandwhentheoffenceis
punishable with more than seven year imprisonment no public
servantistakenasapanchwitnessforsearchofthehouseofaccused
no.6 Saibaba. Though there is an admission on the part of
InvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawche,thedefencesidefailedto
point out under which law the permission of Vicechancellor is
requiredandthatwhentheoffenceispunishableformorethanseven
years imprisonment the public servant is necessary to be taken as
panchwitness. Onthecontrary,InvestigatingOfficerP.W.11Suhas
Bawche in his crossexamination stated that when he went to the
Delhialongwithhispolicestaffon1292013andherequestedPolice
Station officer, Morisnagar for providing panch witness and the
Morisnagar Police Station procured police staff and panch witness
P.W.2 Jagat Bhole and thereafter Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas
BawchealongwithpolicestaffofAheriPoliceStationandMorisnagar
PoliceStationandP.W.2JagatBholeconductedthesearch. Hence,
panch witness P.W.2 Jagat Bhole provided by Morisnagar Police
Station was taken by Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche.
Therefore,noillegalitywascommittedbyInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11
SuhasBawche.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
174 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

246] Accordingtodefenceaccusedno.6Saibabahadrequested
totakesearchofhishouseinpresenceofProfessorsandstudentsof
Delhi University and his friend Advocates but the house search of
accused no.6 Saibaba was not taken inspite of his said request.
However, Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in his cross
examination clearly stated that said request was made after
completionofsearch,hencethereisnosubstanceintheargumentof
defencethatstudents,professorofDelhiUniversitywerenottakenas
apanchasforhousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

247] Accordingtothedefencethereisomissionaboutthefact
that25to30CDs,laptop,4to5pendrives,4to5harddisk,5to6
bookswerefoundduringhousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaisnot
mentionedinpanchanama(Exh.165),however,ongoingthroughthe
panchanamaExh.165itisclearthatinthesaidpanchanamadetailsof
electronicgadgetsCDs,DVDs,pendrivesandharddisksi.e.Articles
no.1to41arementionedinit.TheevidenceofP.W.2JagatBholeand
Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche is clear that the articles
no.1to41alongwithotherarticleslikemagazines,bookswereseized
from the house searchof accusedno.6Saibabaandpanchwitness
P.W.2JagatBholeandInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawchehave
identifiedallthearticlesbeforetheCourt.Hence,merenonmention
of above fact in the panchanama Exh.165 is not fatal to the
prosecution.

248] According to the defence there is possibility of altering

andtamperingoftheelectronicgadgetsArts.1to41andforthat
purposedefencereliedontheadmissiongivenbyInvestigatingOfficer
P.W.11SuhasBawcheinhiscrossexaminationwhereinheadmitted
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
175 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

thatthereisawebsiteoninternetfornaxalrelatedbannedthoughts
and all information regarding CPI Maoist and naxal literature,
meetings, centralcommitteeresolutionsareavailableandthereare
also website on internet regarding to naxal literature and their
committee,meetings,resolutionsetc.

249] Inthepresentcasethedatacontainedintextformwas
found in harddisk seized from the house search of accused no.6
Saibabaisletters,correspondencebyComradestomembersofCPI
(Maoist), draft manifesto of RDF organisation, personal
communicationi.e.emailandthedefencehasnotbeenabletoshow
thattheelectronicdataintextformisthesamewhichisavailableon
thewebsiteoninternet.Hence,itcannotbesaidthatprosecutionhas
manipulated, fabricated the data downloaded and copied from
internetintheelectronicgadgetsandshownittobeseizedfromthe
house search of accused no.6 Saibaba. Further according to the
defencesaidelectronicgadgetswerecollectedfromdensandthose
wereshowntobeseizedfromhousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.
However, Art.1 to 41 i.e. CDs, DVDs, Pendrives, Memory cards
electronicdatacontainedinCDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisksseized
fromthehousesearchofaccusedNo.6Saibabacontainsseveraltexts
documentsaddressedbyaccusedNo.6Saibabainhisownnameand
some time in the name of Prakash to the members of banned
organizationCPIMaoistandRDF. Furtherthereareseveralfamily
photographofSaibabaand,personalemailsofSaibabaareappearing
intheharddisksseizedfromhousesearchofaccusedSaibaba,hence
thecontentionofthedefencethattheaboveelectronicgadgetswere
seizedfromonedensisfalse.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
176 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

TamperingofSealandHashValue

250] According to the defence the hash value of 16 GB

memorycardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthepersonalsearchof
accusedno.3HemMishraandArts.1to41CDs,DVDs,pendrives,
harddisksallegedtobeseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
Saibabawasnottakenatthetimeofseizure.Hence,theCFSLreports
(Exh.266 and267)donot carryanyvalue. Fromtheevidence of
P.W.10 Anil Badgujar it reveals that after the seizure of 16 GB
memorycard of Sandisk company from the possession of accused
no.3 Hem Mishra on 22.8.2013 it was sealed having labels of
signatures of panch witness P.W.1 Santosh Bawne and P.W.10 Anil
Badgujar and thereafter he immediately deposited the said 16 GB
memorycardwiththemuddemalclerkofAheriPoliceStationP.W.13
GaneshRathodonthesamedayandanentrytothateffectwastaken
inmuddemalregistervideExh.276Ashowingthatitwasdepositedin
sealedconditionandon25.8.2013saidmemorycardwastakenout
byP.W.11SuhasBawcheforsendingittoCFSL,Mumbaiforscientific
examination in sealed condition and handedover to carrier P.W.5
RavindraKumbhareandhedeposited16GBmemorycardofSandisk
company to CFSL, Mumbai in sealed condition. The evidence of
P.W.21BhaveshNikamshowsthathereceived16GBmemorycardfor
examinationinsealedconditionon25.08.2013.

251] FurtherinrespectofArts.1to41CDs,DVDs,pendrives,
harddisks there is evidence of Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas
BawcheandpanchwitnessP.W.2JagatBholethaton12.9.2013they
hadbeentothehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaandfromhishouse
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
177 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

searchelectronicgadgetsArts.1to41CDs,DVDs,pendrives,hard
diskswereseizedunderpanchanamaatExh.165andafterseizureof
thesame, alltheelectronicdevicesincludingArts.no.1to41were
sealedinoneplasticbox,laptopwaskeptinanotherpacketandthe
printed matter and books were kept in third packet and all three
packetsweresealedandlabelsofsignaturesofInvestigatingOfficer
P.W.11 Suhas Bawche and panch P.W.2 Jagat Bhole were affixed
thereonandInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawchecamebyplane
toNagpurandthentoAheriPoliceStationimmediatelyon13.9.2013
andonthesamedayhedepositedthesealedarticlesinAheriPolice
Stationandanentrytothateffectwastakeninmuddemalregisterby
P.W.13GaneshRathodvideExh.276C.

252] On perusal of entry Exh.276C in muddemal register it

revealsthaton13.9.2013InvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawche,
SDPO,Aherihaddepositedonesealedplasticboxandtwosealedbig
paperpacketinAheriPoliceStation.Accordingtotheprosecutionin
ordertoseparatethemobilephonesfromelectronicgadgetsArts.1to
41CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddiskstheboxcontainingArts.1to41
CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddiskswasopenedinpresenceofpanch
witness P.W.4 Shrikant Gaddewar and at that time earlier sealed
plastic box bearing signaturesofInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11Suhas
Bawche and panch witness P.W.2 Jagat Bhola were removed and
mobile phones were separated and new seals having signatures of
Investigating OfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheandpanchwitnessP.W.4
ShrikantGaddewardated14.9.2013wereaffixedandtothateffect
panchnamaatExh.202waspreparedandthereafter, saidproperty
wassentthroughcarrierP.W.5RavindraKumbharetoCFSLMumbai
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
178 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

by letter dated 14.9.2013 and as deposed by Investigating Officer

P.W.11 Suhas Bawche that there weresealed24packetsandwhen
P.W.5RavindraKumbharealongwithP.W.15NarendraDubeyhadgone
toCFSL,Mumbai,theofficerofCFSLaskedthemasthesaidproperty
was relating to one crime, that officer asked him to put the said
propertyinoneboxandheprocuredoneboxwiththehelpofP.W.15
NarendraDubeyandputallthe24sealedpacketandoneparcelin
thesaidboxandputsealthereonandtothateffectthereisearlier
entryhavingsignatureofClerkofCFSLaboutreceiptof24sealed
packets.Though,therearesomediscrepanciesintheevidenceofP.W.
5 Ravindra Kumbhare and P.W. 15 Narendra Dubey those
discrepanciesareinrespectofonlyputtingof24sealedpacketsin
plasticboxandnotinrespectof24sealedpacketshavingsealsand
signaturesofInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheandpanch
witnessP.W.4ShrikantGaddewar.Hence,defencecannotmakeany
useofthesame.

253] FurthertheevidenceofScientificexpertP.W.21Bhavesh
Nikamrevealsthathereceived24sealedpacketsforexaminationand
thoseweresealedandthereafterheopenedthose24packets.From
this fact, prosecution has clearlyestablished the fact that afterthe
seizureof16GBmemorycardandelectronicgadgetsatArticles1to
41thosearticles/propertiesweresealedwiththelabelsofsignatureof
panchasandpolicetillitwassenttoCFSLforexaminationandthat
tilltheopeningofthosepacketsthesealwasintact. Therewasno
timeforpoliceofficerforfabricationandmanipulationinelectronic
data contained therein and thereafter on examination of 16 GB
memorycardandArticles1to41CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisk
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
179 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ScientificExpertP.W.21BhaveshNikamhadtakenouthashvalueof
thesaidgadgetsasappearinginCFSLreportsatExhs.266and267.
Theyarereproducedasunder:

(ExhibitNo.266)
HashValue

254] AllthecontentsofmemorycardinexhibitEx1aregiven
inanannexureharddiskmarkedasAnnexureHardDiskCy446
13.Thedetailsaregivenasbelow;

Sr.No. Exhibit Detailsaregiveninfile HashValue

No. named
1 Ex1 Ex1AllFileDetails.xls a9e044aaea37f9756c30e
f52d37d7974

RESULTSOFANALYSIS
(ExhibitNo.267)

255] OnthoroughcyberforensicanalysisofexhibitsEx1toEx
25/1followingwererevealed.
1] Thedetailsoftotaldiskcapacityandpartitioncapacityof
harddisksaregivenasbelow:

Sr. Exhibit Total Partition AcquiredintheHardDisk

No. No. Capacity Capacity
1 Ex3 931.48 931.48GB Make:Seagate,Capacity:1TB,
GB Model:ST31000322CS,S/N:5VX2SVPE,
Markedas:ImageofCy475/13Ex3,
MD5HashofForensicImage:
a77d51cdd3a18c32bb95653110086cfa
2 Ex4 297.49 297.48GB Make:WesternDigital,Capacity:2TB,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
180 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

GB Model:WD20EARXOOPASBO,
S/N:WCAZAL276482,
Markedas:ImageofCy475/13Ex4&5,
MD5HashofForensicImage:
8CED9C856A6D671B85D9B6BAB25F8109
3 Ex5 931.51 931.51GB Make:WesternDigital,Capacity:2TB,
GB Model:WD20EARXOOPASBO,
S/N:WCAZAL276482,
Markedas:ImageofCy475/13Ex4&5,
MD5HashofForensicImage:
efe5ce211c5e941025c25454fd7dbaf6
4 Ex25 465.76 12.95GB Make:Seagate,Capacity:500GB,
GB 100MB Model:ST500DM002,S/N:Z3TPHA8J,
452.72GB Markedas:ImageofCy475/13other,
MD5HashofForensicImage:
6ee482dad22c15f4215752c50406f118

2] The CDs and DVDs are acquired in hard disk [Make:

Seagate, Model: ST500DM002, S/N: Z3TPHA8J,Capacity: 500GB].
Thedetailsoftotaldiskcapacityanddatacapacityareasfollows;

Sr. Exh.No. Disk Date HashValue

No. Capacity Capacity
1 Ex6/2 4.7GB 4.11GB C10680C6B242878C459094617F62FE38
2 Ex7/1 4.7GB 2.85GB 686DBE3AE6275A7A430DA430F8C8158F
3 Ex7/2 4.7GB 3.33GB 6007D9461883CBEOBB8F1F4C6D2B5CCO
4 Ex7/3 4.7GB 2.00GB 3BA35224DA6E58A3DBOBAC1AB3A7DE02
5 Ex8 4.7GB 4.31GB 22757987E266C3D2EDOD3C430007694D
6 Ex9 4.7GB 4.20GB CEB1DF18F4946FO171A67146B66CD59A
7 Ex10 4.7GB 3.88GB D275EA24504BC65E58A3744A8609EE5A
8 Ex11/1 4.7GB 3.56GB 97555BB79F0319BD52AOEAF26DFE2DBE
9 Ex11/2 4.7GB 3.73GB DCDF9C2F1693A5CE20096A44F9666DCA
10 Ex12 4.7GB 456.56 ACD5202277B0883BACBEE2CFB0CF0BCF
MB
11 Ex15 4.7GB 4.30GB 80E49A952F9B93C34E819F6DDC8D1EF4
12 Ex16 4.7GB 1.37GB B21DE36B55F9AD60C273EB01F3E2550F
13 Ex17 700MB 303.58 C42DE937D3D68632048A3D50DB59605B
MB
14 Ex18/1 4.7GB 2.43GB 6370545844C6A45FE5BD78B0899C8DBE
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
181 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

15 EX18/2 4.7GB 2.38GB 30595B2EC2AF89EF2E5E79A64EB13C46

16 Ex18/3 4.7GB 2.13GB EF88A6963972271CE4B5567B5BDC6F7F
17 Ex18/4 4.7GB 2.44GB 1e25d4ca7a20b2ca8ae5611fda186c66
18 Ex18/5 4.7GB 2.40GB 566E10E003CC7713C7ACBAE7FE6EB449
19 Ex18/6 4.7GB 2.43GB 6432EC8D5C5CBB128931C972A7EE0008
20 Ex18/7 4.7GB 2.43GB EF0434B86989D02B60693A22BC04C109
21 Ex19 700MB 502.82 AB8E8167778FC2424F63C57B98C72EC8
MB
22 Ex20/3 4.7GB 2.45GB F09A3B69D5F41546FAC6F2416261682D
23 Ex20/4 4.7GB 2.5GB 2FCAA696EFFC0B629373EC48E7F44973
24 EX20/5 4.7GB 708.47 579D77F3121BF05FD9D92B3A0EC0C0F5
MB

3] The pendrivesandmemorycardsare acquiredinhard

disk[Make:Seagate,Model:ST500DM002S/N:Z3TPHA8J,Capacity:
500GB].Thedetailsoftotaldiskcapacityandpartitioncapacityare
asfollows:

Sr. Exhibit Disk Partition HashValue

No. No. Capacity Capacity
1 Ex21 29.82GB 29.82GB A8083D4B8021E59E414A6DA6EF7E0C4B
2 Ex22 7.52GB 7.52GB 38FF8914BADBEB5A337B7D152C0226D2
3 Ex23 15.11GB 15.11GB 9CFD64D314EBB0E906AAE727722DCF34
4 Ex24 29.72GB 29.72GB 9126ACEBF152378E04C7C012A1D8104A

256] Thepoliceofficerhadnooccasiontotakehashvalueat
thetimeofseizure.Ordinarycomputerexpertcannotdeterminethe
hashvalueoftheelectronicgadgets.Therefore,itwassenttoCFSL,
Mumbai.Hence,merelybecausethehashvaluewasnottakenatthe
timeofseizurethatcannotbeagroundtorejecttheprosecutioncase.
Astheprosecutionhasprovedthisfactthatfromthetimeofseizure
of electronic gadgets till its examination by CFSL expert P.W.21
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
182 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

BhaveshNikamthosewereinsealedconditiontherewasnotimeor
opportunitytopolicetofabricateormanipulatetheelectronicdata
containedtherein.

257] It is important to note here that the defence has filed

applicationatExh.145on4.1.2016forgettingsoftcopiesofthedata
contained in electronic gadgets 16 GB memorycard of Sandisk
companyandArticles1to41i.e.CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks.
In order to preserve the hash value in respect of electronic data
contained in the said electronic gadgets to make out possibility of
editing,tamperingandalterationbyvirtueoforderdated 4.1.2016
passedbelowExh.145,electronicgadgetsArticles1to41i.e.CDs,
DVDs, pendrives, harddisks, laptop, memorycard seized from the
housesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaand16G.B.memorycardof
Sandiskcompanyseizedfrompossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishra
were sent to CFSL Mumbai formakingsoftcopiesofthesamefor
providing to prosecution and defence.The CFSL Mumbai prepared
the soft copies of the same and sent the same to the Court and
thereafter those soft copies of electronic data contained in 16GB
memorycard and Arts.1 to 41 were supplied to prosecution and
defence and while recording statements of accused No.3, 4 and 6
under section 313 of Cr.P.C. The text documents, video clips and
photographs were opened on the laptop of the Court and on the
laptopofdefenceadvocateandthetextdocument,videoclipsand
photographs were compared from the original electronic gadgets
whicharethemuddemalpropertiesbeforetheCourtandfromthe
soft copies supplied to defence and thereafter answers given by
accusedNo.3,4and6wererecordedandtheCourtdidnotfindany
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
183 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

change or alteration in the said text documents, video clips and

photographs, hence thoughthe hash value of the seized electronic
gadgets was not taken at the time of seizure it is not fatal to
prosecution.

Sending of 16 GB memorycard of Sandisk Company to CFSL,

Mumbaiforscientificexamination

258] According to prosecution the 16 GB memory card of

sandiskcompanyseizedfrompersonalsearchofaccusedNo.3Hem
Mishra was sent to CFSL, Mumbai for examination through P.W.5
RavindraKumbhare.Toprovethisfactprosecutionhasreliedonthe
evidenceoffollowingwitnesses

Sr. P.W. NameofWitness Exhibit

No. No. No.
1] P.W.5 Ravindra Manohar Kumbhare, the PC and 210
carrier who carried and deposited the
muddemaltoCFSL,Mumbai.
2] P.W.13 Ganesh Rahod, the Muddemal Clerk in 298
AheriPoliceStation
3] P.W.21 Bhavesh Nikam, Scientific Expert who 371
receivedelectronicgadgets16GBmemory
cardforscientificanalysis

Evidence

259] Muddemal Clerk of Aheri Police Station P.W.13 Ganesh

Rathodinhisexaminationstatedthaton25.08.2013themuddemal
propertyi.e.16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthe
possessionofaccusedNo.3HemMishrawassentalongwithcarrier
P.W.5P.C.RavindraKumbhareB.No.2086toCFSL,Mumbaiandhehad
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
184 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

taken note to that effect in Muddemal Register at Exh.276A and

obtainedsignatureofP.W.5P.C.RavindraKumbhareonit.Thecopyof
entry is at Exh.276A shows signature of P.W.5 P.C.Kumbhare about
receiptsofthesame.ThelearneddefenceAdvocateShriGadlingdid
notcrossexaminethiswitnessonthispointspecifically.

260] P.W.5RavindraKumbhareinhisexaminationstatedthat
on25.08.2013hereceivedmemorycardofSandiskcompanyseized
fromthepossessionofaccusedNo.3HemMishrafromInvestigating
OfficerSDPOP.W.11SuhasBawchefordepositingthesametoCFSL,
Bombaybyletterdated25.08.2013andhereceivedthesaidmemory
cardinsealedconditionfromAheriP.S.andhetookthesameand
depositedthesamewithCFSL,Bombayon30.08.2013andgotthe
acknowledgementfromtheCFSLOffice,BombayvideletterExh.211.

261] AlongwiththesaidletterquestionnaireatExh.211Awere
soughtbyInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheandtheseareas
under

1] makeofthememorycardanditscapacity
2] twocopiesofdatacontainingmemorycard
3] softandhardcopyaboutallinformationinmemorycard
4] tostatewhetherthefileswereprotectedbypasswordand
toopenthesaidpasswordandgivedetailsoffile
containingthesaidmemorycard.

262] ThelearneddefenceAdvocateShriGadlingdidnotcross
examinethiswitnessonthispointspecifically.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
185 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

263] Scientific Officer P.W.21 Bhavesh Nikam in his

examinationinchiefstatedthathereceivedletterdated25.08.2013
alongwith one 16 GB memory card, on which Sandisk Micro SD
capacity16GBwrittenanditwasreceivedinhisofficeon30.08.2013
andwhenthememorycardwasreceived,itwasinsealedcondition
and alongwith letter dated 25.08.2013 he received questionnaire
from the Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche. The learned
defenceAdvocateShriGadlingdidnotcrossexaminethiswitnesson
thispointspecifically.

SendingofElectronicGadgetsArticlesNo.1to41CDs,DVDs,pen
drives,harddisksseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
SaibabatoCFSL,Mumbai.

264] According to the prosecution the electronic gadgets

alongwithmobilephonesofaccusedno.6Saibabaweresealedinone
boxhavinglabelsofsignatureofP.W.2JagatBholeandP.W.11Suhas
Bawche and as the mobile phones were to be separated from
electronic gadget, P.W.11 Suhas Bawche called P.W.4 Shrikant
Gaddewarandremovedtheearliersealofhavinglabelsofsignature
ofhimselfandP.W.2JagatBholeandseparatedthemobilephones,
thereafter he put all electronic gadgets i.e. CDs, DVDs, pendrives,
harddisksin24pocketsandthosewereputintheplasticboxand
sealedinhispresenceandthelabelcontainingsignatureofhimself
andP.W.4ShrikantGaddewar,wereaffixedtoplasticboxandthen
sentthesametoCFSL,MumbaithroughP.W.5RavindraKumbhare
and P.W.15 Narendra Dube and P.W.21 received the same for
examination. To prove this fact prosecution has relied on the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
186 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

evidenceoffollowingwitnesses:

Sr. P.W. NameofWitness Exhibit

No. No. No.
1] P.W.4 ShrikantGaddewar,panchwitness 198
2] P.W.5 Ravindra Manohar Kumbhare, the PC and 210
carrier who carried and deposited the
muddemaltoCFSL,Mumbai.
3] P.W.11 InvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche 235
4] P.W.13 Ganesh Rathod, Muddemal Clerk in Aheri 298
PoliceStation
5] P.W.15 Narendra Dubey Station Diary Incharge in 308
AheriPoliceStationwhoaccompaniedP.W.5
Ravindra while carrying electronic gadgets
(Arts.1to41)
6] P.W.21 Bhavesh Nikam, Scientific Expert who 371
receivedelectronicgadgets16GBmemory
cardforscientificanalysis

Evidence

265] Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in his

examinationatExh.235statedthattheelectronicgadgetsArts.1to41
seizedthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaweresentalongwith
P.W.13P.C.KumbharetoCFSL,Bombaybyletterdated14.09.2014at
Exh.212.

266] PanchwitnessP.W.4ShrikantGaddewarinhisexamination
atExh.198statedthatpolicecalledhiminAheriPoliceStationon14
92013inafternoonandatthattime,thepoliceofficials,panchasand
P.W.11Dy.SPBawchewerepresentthereandpolicetoldhimthatafter
obtaining search warrant from the court they had seized some
propertyfromthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaandthesamewasto
beopenedtoverifywhethersomepropertywasrequiredtobesentto
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
187 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Forensic laboratory. He stated that then police had brought one

plasticboxandtwosealedpacketsandthoseweresealedwithhis
signatureandsignatureofpoliceandhestatedthatpoliceopened
plastic box and in the said plastic box hard disk, pendrive three
mobile phones were found and there was one harddisk, one CD
writer,threemobilephonesandfourpendrivesandoneharddiskof
SeagatecompanyandotherwasofWDbuffalocompanyandonone
harddisk 'my passport' was written. One pendrive of Sandisk
companyandanotherwasofsonycompanyandonependrivewasof
Dellcompanyandone32GBmemorycardofsandiskcompanyand
thosewere25to30CDsandtherewasblacklaptopofsonycompany
alongwithbluetoothdevicewasfoundinsideonepacket.Inanother
packet there were books. Except three mobiles and books, all
electronicdeviceslikebluetoothandCDwriter,harddisks,pendrive
andDVDswereputinoneplasticboxandpanchanamatothateffect
waspreparedatExh.202.

267] During crossexamination he admitted that plastic box

beforetheCourtwasnotbroughtbeforehimatPoliceStationbutall
thearticleswereinhardboardbox.

268] RavindraKumbhare(P.W.5)inhisexaminationatExh.210
hasstatedthat thepropertyseizedfromaccusedno.6Saibabawas
senttoCFSLMumbaiandon1592013hereceivedsealedpackets
regardingseizureofarticlesfromthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibaba
inCrimeNo.3017/2013byletter(Exh.212)underthesignaturesof
P.W.11 SDPO Bawche and thereafter he deposited the said sealed
envelop in the office of CFSL Bombay on 1792013 and got the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
188 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

acknowledgementaboutthereceiptfromCFSLBombay. Hestated
that muddemal which he deposited on 1792013 consisted of 24
sealed packets and one sealed parcel and when he went to CFSL,
Bombay on 1792013 for depositing 24 sealed packets and one
parcelinsealedcondition,theofficerofCFSLaskedhimtogivethe
saidpropertyinoneboxandheprocuredoneboxwiththehelpof
onepoliceofficerbynameNarendraDube,whowasalongwithhim
andputallthe24sealedpacketsandoneparcelinthesaidboxand
putsealthereon.OnthesaidcopyofletterofficeofCFSL,Mumbai
gavereceiptsofonesealedparcel,sixblankharddisksandbelowthat
signatureofMaheshKhanvekarandsealofCFSlanappearing,but
beforethatentryofreceiptsof24sealedpockets,onesealedparcel,
belowthatthereissignatureofconcernedclerkandthisentrywas
scratchedandsubsequentaboveentrywastaken.Tothateffectthere
isacopyofletteratExh.212,inwhichitismentionedthat1]one
sealedplasticbox;2] onesealedparcel;3] six blank harddisks
werereceivedbyCFSL,MumbaiandbelowthatsignatureofMahesh
Khavnekar,sealofofficeofCFSLisappearing. BeforethatMahesh
Khavanekarhasreceived24sealedpacketsand1sealedparcelandto
thateffectheputhissignatureandsealofofficeofCFSL.

269] Hefurtherstatedthathehadhandedover6blankhard
diskstoCFSL,Bombayforgettingmirrorimages.

270] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel. Inhiscrossexaminationheadmittedthathedidnotstate
before police in his statement that The muddemal which he
depositedon17.9.2013consistof24sealedpacketsandonesealed
parcel and when he went on 1792013 for depositing 24 sealed
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
189 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

packets and one parcel in sealed condition to CFSL Bombay, the

officerofCFSL,Bombayaskedhimtogivethesaidpropertyinone
boxandaccordinglyheprocuredoneboxwiththehelpofonepolice
officerwhowasalongwithhimandputallthe24sealedpacketsand
oneparcelinthesaidboxandputsealthereonwhichwasbroughtby
P.W.15DubeyH.C. Headmittedthathedidnotstateinhispolice
statement that he depositedmirrorimagesin Police Station,Aheri.
Hedenied thathedeposedfalselythathehadgivensecondcopyof
mirrorimagestoP.W.11SDPOBawcheon3182013.Hedeniedthat
heneverreceivedanypropertyfromAheriPoliceStationandnever
carriedthesametoCFSLBombayandneverreceivedmirrorimages
from CFSL Bombay and never deposited the same in Aheri Police
Station.

271] Narendra Dube (P.W.15) who was attached to Police

Station, Aheri as ASI. He accompanied with Ravindra Kumbhare
(P.W.5) to CFSL, Mumbai. He in his examination at Exh.308 has
stated that on 1492013 / 1592013 he along with P.W.5 Police
Constable Kumbhare had been to CFSL Mumbai along with
muddemal on 1792013for depositing24sealed packetsandone
parcelinsealedcondition.Thensaidofficeraskedhimtogiveallthe
propertyinoneboxandaccordinglytheyprocuredoneplasticbox
withthehelpofonepoliceofficerwhowasalongwiththemandput
laptopandother24sealedpacketsseparatelyandoneparcelinthe
saidboxandputsealthereonalongwithharddisks.

272] This witness was crossexamined by learned defence

counsel.Inhiscrossexaminationheadmittedthatthesealofpolice
stationisinthecustodyofMalkhanaMoharirandhedoesnotknow
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
190 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

whether there is movement register of seal in police station. He

admittedthatatpresenttheplasticboxdoesnothaveanysealand
label.HedeniedthatentryistobetakeninMalkhanaregisterwhen
thesealistoberemovedfromMalkhanaandhedidnotgowithwax
seal in the office CFSL, Mumbai and 24 articles were not kept in
plasticboxandthereafterhehadnotsealedthesamewithhisseal
andthereafteritwasnothandedovertoCFSLMumbai.

273] ScientificOfficerofCFSL,MumbaiP.W.21BhaveshNikam
in his examination at Exh.371 stated that he received letter dated
14.09.2014sentbyInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheSDPO
Aherialongwith24sealedpacketsandonemoreparcelwithblank
harddisks and his office received the property on 17.09.2013 and
letterExh.212bearssealofinwardclerkofhisoffice.

ArgumentoflearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathan

274] ThelearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathansubmittedthat16
GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthepossessionof
accusedno.3HemMishraandelectronicgadgetslikeCDs,DVDs,pen
drives, harddisks (Arts.1 to 41) seized from the house search of
accusedno.6Saibabaweresentforexaminationandanalystreportto
CFSL,MumbaithroughthecarrierRavindraKumbhare(P.W.5). To
thateffect,RavindraKumbhare(P.W.5)hascategoricallystatedinhis
examinationthaton30.8.2013hedepositedthe16GBmemorycard
toCFSL,Mumbaiwhichhereceivedalongwithletter(Exh.211)from
AheriPoliceStationandgotacknowledgementtothateffectandon
17.9.2013hedeposited24sealedpacketsandoneparceli.e.Arts.1to
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
191 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

41seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6toCFSL,Mumbai.
This fact is corroborated by P.W.15 Narendra Dube who had
accompanied Ravindra Kumbhare (P.W.5) to the office of CFSL,
Mumbai on 14.9.2013 and on 17.9.2013 and deposited 24 sealed
packetsandoneparcelinsealedcondition. Hence,prosecutionhas
established the sending of articles seized from accused no.3 Hem
Mishraandno.6SaibabatoCFSL,Mumbaiinthiscase.

ArgumentoflearnedAdvocateShriGadling

275] HesubmittedthatpanchwitnessP.W.4ShrikantGaddewar
statedinhisexaminationinchiefinpara7thatpolicecalledhimin
Aheri P.S. on 1492013 in afternoon and police told that after
obtaining search warrant from the court they had seized some
propertyfromthehouseofaccusedno.6G.N.Saibabaandthesame
wastobeopenedandseenandtoverifywhethersomepropertywas
requiredtobesenttoForensiclaboratoryandthenpolicehadbrought
one plastic box and two sealed paper packets which bear their
signatures.Hefurtherstatedthatthosewereopenedinhispresence
andplasticboxwascontainingelectronicgadgetslikeharddiscs,pen
drives,CDs,threemobilesetc.andinblackcolouredlaptopofSony
company alongwith bluetooth device wasfoundinside one packet
and in another packet there were books and three mobiles and
panchanamatothateffectwaspreparedatExh.202.

276] He invited attention of the Court on para no.8 of the

examinationofInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheinwhichhe
statedthatalltheelectronicdevicesseizedfromthehousesearchof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
192 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accusedno.6Saibabaweresealedinplasticbox,laptopwasseizedin
separate packet, the printed matter and books were sealed in 3
separate packets and all three items were sealed with labels of
signaturesofpanchasunderpanchanamaatExh.165.

277] He submitted that when Investigating Officer P.W.11

SuhasBawchehadsegregatedallthepropertiesinoneplasticboxand
other two packets on 12.9.2013there wasnonecessitytoprepare
panchanamaon14.9.2013forsendingthesaidpropertytoCFSLand
the said panchanama was prepared by Investigating Officer P.W.11
SuhasBawcheashewantedtoplantelectronicgadgetstoshowthat
the property wasseized fromthehousesearchofaccusedSaibaba
andthepropertywhichtheprosecutionallegedtohaveseizedwas
neverseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaandas
suchnoelectronicgadgetsArt.1to41likeCDs,DVDs,pendrivesand
harddiskswereseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba
and were sent to CFSL and there was no necessity to prepare
panchanamaExh.202anddifferentpropertywhichwassenttoCFSL
wasplantedbyinvestigatingofficerP.W.11SuhasBawche.Hence,it
was argued that no value is attachedtotheCFSLreport andthe
evidence of P.W.4 Shrikant Gaddewar who was acting under the
thumbofpoliceisnotreliable.

278] He submittedthat theoryofputtingallpropertyin one

plastic box is concocted as it falsifies the version of prosecution
witnesses and from the covering letter dated 21.9.2013 of P.W.11
SuhasBawcheitisclearthatpropertyincrimeno.3017/2013was
sent in the packet and parcel and hence there was no reason for
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
193 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

askingthequestionbyofficerofCFSLtoP.W.5RavindraKumbhare
whetherthesaidpropertywasinthesamecrimeorindifferentcrime.
If the contention of the prosecution is accepted that on 21.9.2013
P.W.11SuhasBawcheputallpropertyinoneplasticboxtherewasno
reasontohavelabelsandsignaturesofpanchaswhichwereallegedto
be made on 14.9.2013 and there should have been seal and
signatures of either of P.W.15 Narendra Dube and P.W.5 Ravindra
KumbhareandCFSLreportExh.267saysthatthesealedpacketswere
intact.

279] He submittedthat P.W.5RavindraKumbhare statedthat

property was kept in one plastic box and CFSL report Exh.267 on
record says that one sealed packet and one parcel were received.
Hence,CFSLreportExh.267contradictstheoraltestimonyofP.W.5
RavindraKumbhareandP.W.15NarendraDube. Forabovegrounds,
heprayedrejectionofprosecutionevidenceonaboveaspect.

Conclusion

280] P.W.11 Suhas Bawche, in his examinationinchief stated

thatwhileinterrogatingwithaccusedno.3HemMishraandaccused
No.4 Prashant Rahi, he came to know about the involvement of
accusedno.6Saibaba,thereafterhemadeanapplicationatExh.268
beforeJ.M.F.C.,Aheriforgettingpermissiontocarryoutthehouse
search of accused No.6 Saibaba at his house at Delhi. The said
applicationwasmadeon26.02.2014. Thereafteron12.09.2013he
went to Morisnagar Police Station at Delhi and requested them to
provide police staff and panchas for carrying out house search of
accusedNo.6SaibabaatDelhi.TheyprovidedP.W.2JagatBholeand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
194 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

anotherpanchaRamkumar.Thereafter,healongwithpolicestaffand
panchaswenttohouseofaccusedNo.6Saibaba,whichissituatedin
thecampusofDelhiUniversity.BeforeproceedingtoDelhi,hemade
anentryintheStationdiaryon09.09.2013andthecopyofstation
diaryisproducedonrecordatExh.275. On12.09.2013whenthe
wifeofaccusedSaibaba,Vasantawaspresent,heshowedthecopyof
searchwarranttoherandaskedhertocallSaibaba,thenaccused
Saibabacameathouse.Thereafterheofferedtotakepersonalsearch
ofhimself,policeofficersandpanchas,buttheyrefusedforthesame
andthisfactismentionedinthepanchanamaatExh.165.Thereafter
he carried out the house search of accused Saibaba and seized
extensive electronic gadgets CDs, pendrive, harddisks, laptop
containingelectronicdataintheformoftext,audio,videoclipsand
photographs alongwith other articles and the copy of panchanama
Exh.165 and the said property was selaed with the labels having
signature of panchas and police and copy was given to accused
Saibabaandhissignaturewasobtainedthereon.

281] Thereafter on 13.09.2013hecame toNagpurbyplane,

thereafter to Aheri Police Station and deposited all the electronic
gadgets in sealed condition with P.W.13 Ganesh Rathod. To that
effect there is an entry in muddemal register at Exh.276D.
Thereafterinordertoseparatethemobilephonesfromtheelectronic
gadgets,whichiskeptinonebox,asthesaidelectronicgadgetswere
tobesenttoCFSL,Mumbaiforexamination.HecalledP.W.4Shrikant
Gaddewarandseparatedthepropertyfromthesaidbox,atthattime,
earlier seal and having labels of his signature and panchas was
removedandalltheelectronicgadgetsArt.1to41wereputin24
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
195 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

packets and labels of signature of himself and P.W.4 Shrikant

Gaddewar dated 14.09.2013 were affixed and the said 24 sealed
packets were sent through carrier P.W.5 Ravindra Kumbhare for
depositing the same to CFSL, Mumbai. Ravindra Kumbhare P.W.5
alongwithP.W.15NarendraDubewenttoCFSL,officeanddeposited
24sealedpacketswithCFSL,Mumbaitothateffect.Initially,there
wasentrybytheclerkMaheshKhavnekaraboutthereceiptsofsealed
24packetswithhissignatureandsealofofficeofCFSL,Mumbai,but
attheinstanceofMaheshKhavnekar,theRavindraKumbhareP.W.5
andNarendraDubeP.W.15putthesameinoneanotherplasticbox
andtothateffectthereisanentrydated17.09.2013.P.W.21Bhavesh
Nikamopenedtheplasticboxon19.09.2013andhefound24sealed
packetscontainingelectronicgadgets. Thoughtheplasticboxwas
changed,butthe24sealedpacketswereinsealedconditionbefore
examinationbyP.W.21BhaveshNikam.

282] Thedatacontainingarticles1to41isaround3TBand
aftertheseizureofarticle1to41underpanchanamaExh.165those
weresealedwiththesignatureofP.W.2JagatBholeandinthesealed
condition art.1 to 41 alongwith other articles were deposited with
P.W.13 Ganesh Rathod, Muddemal Clerk, Police Station Aheri.
Thereafter on 14.09.2013 the property/Articles 1 to 41 were
separated from mobile phones and those were put in 24 packets,
thoseweresealedwiththesignatureofSuhasBawcheandShrikant
and those were handed over to P.W.5 Ravindra Kumbahre and he
depositedon17.09.2013all24sealedpacketsinCFSL,Mumbai,but
onlyboxwaschangedandP.W.21BhaveshNikamexaminedthesame
on14.02.2014beforeexaminationhefound24sealedpackets.This
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
196 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

shows that at no point of time P.W.11 Suhas Bawche had an

opportunitytomanipulateelectronicdataaround3TBinArt.1to41
and16GBmemorycardseizedfrompossessionofaccusedNo.3Hem
Mishra.

283] Even,assumingforthesakeofargument,therearesome
discrepancies in the evidence of P.W.2 Jagat Bhole, P.W.11 Suhas
Bawche,P.W.5RavindraKumbhareandP.W.15NarendraDubeabout
puttingof24sealedpacketsinplasticboxandsealingofthesame,
buttheevidenceofthesewitnessesisconsistentonthepointthat24
packetswereinsealedcondition.

284] TheApexCourtinthecaseofKrishnaPillaiSreeKumar
and another vs. State of Kerala reported in 1981 Cri.L.J. 743
whereinitisobservedthat
(B) Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S.3 Evidence
AppreciationofCriminaltrialDiscrepancies.

The prosecution evidence no doubt suffers

inconsistencieshereanddiscrepanciestherebutthat
is a shortcoming from which no criminal case is
free. Themainthingtobeseeniswhetherthose
inconsistencies,etc.,gototherootofthematteror
pertain to insignificant aspects thereof. In the
formercasethedefencemaybejustifiedinseeking
advantage of the incongruities obtaining in the
evidenceinthelatter,however,nosuchbenefitmay
be available to it. That is a salutary method of
appreciationofevidenceincriminalcases.(Para11)

285] It is further well settled that while appreciating the

evidenceitisthedutyofthecourttoremovethegrainfromthechaff
andthemaximfalsusinunofalsusinomnibushasnoapplicationin
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
197 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

India. TheApexCourtinthecaseofGunnanaPentayyavs.State
ofA.P.Reportedin2008BHCCO1910inCriminalAppealNo.292
of2006,decidedon20thAugust,2008,inpara15observedthat

E.MaximfalsusinunofalsusinomnibusIt
hasnoapplicationinIndiaEvenifmajorportionof
evidence found to be deficient, residue if found
sufficienttoproveguilt,convictioncanbesustained.

286] SimilarobservationsweremadebytheApexCourtinthe
caseof SuchaSinghandanother.vs.StateofPunjabreported in
AIR2003SupremeCourt3617whereinitisobservedthat

(B)EvidenceAct(1of1872),S.3Maximfalsus
inunofalsusinomnibusNotapplicableinIndia
Majorportionofevidenceofwitnessfounddeficient
ResiduesufficienttoproveguiltofaccusedHe
canbeconvicted,notwithstandingacquittalofother
accusedCourtshouldseparategrainfromchaff.

287] In view of above though there are discrepancies in the

evidenceofprosecutionwitnessesinrespectofputtingofthesealed
packetsinplasticbox,thereisreliableevidenceinrespectofseizure
ofelectronicgadgetsfromthehousesearchofaccusedSaibabaandit
is clear from the examination by CFSL. Evidence of prosecution
witnessesisconsistentandabovediscrepanciesdonotgototheroot
of matter and the prosecution has proved the fact there was no
occasion or opportunities to police to manipulate or alter the
electronic data in the above electronic gadgets which were seized
from the personal search of accused No.3 Hem Mishra and house
searchofaccusedNo.6Saibaba.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
198 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Examinationof16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyseized
from the possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra and Articles
No.1 to 41 CDs, DVDs, pendrives, harddisks seized from the
housesearchofaccusedno.6SaibababyCFSL,Mumbai.

288] Itisthecaseoftheprosecutionthatafterarrestofaccused
no.3HemMishra,16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyalongwith
other articles were seized from his possession under seizure
panchanama(Exh.137)andthesameweredepositedinMalkhanaof
AheriPoliceStationwithMuddemalClerkGaneshRathod(P.W.13).
Further, during investigation involvement of accused no.6 Saibaba
wasrevealedandaftertakingsearchwarrantfromP.W.12Nileshwar
Vyas,InvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche(P.W.21)hadtakenhouse
searchofaccusedno.6SaibabasituatedatDelhiandduringhouse
search electronic gadgets Arts.1 to 41 i.e. CDs, DVDs, pendrives,
harddisksalongwithotherarticleswereseizedfromthehousesearch
ofaccusedno.6Saibabaunderseizurepanchanama(Exh.165).

289] Seizedelectronicdevicesi.e.16GBmemorycardseized
fromaccusedno.3HemMishraandArts.1to41i.e.CDs,DVDs,pen
drives,harddisksalongwithotherarticlesweresentthroughcarrier
Ravindra Kumbhare (P.W.5) to CFSL, Kalina Mumbai for scientific
analysis and report and those articles were examined by Scientific
Expert Bhavesh Nikam (P.W.21) and after examination he issued
analysis report at Exh.266 in respect of 16 GB memorycard of
SandiskCompanyandreportExh.267inrespectofArts.1to41i.e.
CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
199 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

290] Toprovethisaspectprosecutionreliedontheevidenceof
BhaveshNikam(P.W.21)ScientificOfficerCFSL,BombayatExh.371.

EVIDENCE

291] Scientific Officer Bhavesh Nikam (P.W.21) who was

attachedtoCFSL,Mumbai,inhisexaminationatExh.371statedthat
hereceivedletterinCrimeno.3017/2013alongwith16GBMemory
cardofSandiskcompanyon3082013insealedconditionandalso
received questionnaire from investigating officer. He statedthat he
receivedletterdated1492013issuedbyinvestigatingofficerSDPO
Aheri and one sealed box containing 24 sealed packets, one more
sealedparcelandsixblankharddiskswerealsoprovidedtohimand
hereceivedthesameon1792013.

292] Hestatedthatonreceiptofthesaid16GBmemorycard
andArts.1to41heexaminedthesameandheopenedthesealin
frontofHeadofDepartmentShriR.R.Mawleanditwasmarkedat
Exh.X1. He stated that as requested by investigating officer one
mirror image of the memory was provided by attending officer
Mr.UttaraGawandandhandedovertoinvestigatingofficeralongwith
letter dated 3082013 at Exh.372. He opened 24 sealed packets
received from Aheri P.S. in front of Head of the Department and
exhibitnumbersweremarkedtothearticlesprovidedbyinvestigating
officeranddescriptionofexhibitswerementionedindescriptionbook
ofCFSLLab.Heagainsealedthearticlesinforensiclabandkeptin
safecustodyofHeadoftheDepartment.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
200 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

293] Hestatedthaton1992013memorycardand24articles
alongwithlaptopwereprovidedtohimforanalysisforverification
and during analysis he gave exhibits on it and after recovering
deletedfiles,hecreateditsfolderandthenhashingofthefileswere
done and file signature matching was done based on the
questionnairesofInvestigatingofficerandanalysiswasdoneandhe
provided the data present in the exhibits were provided to
investigating officer in harddisk marked as Harddisk Cy47513
Part1, Part2/1 and Part 2/2 with letter dtd. 5 th Oct. 2013 vide
O.W.no.2296/13and2297/13.

294] HestatedthatheissuedlettertoSuhasBawche(P.W.11)
SDPOAheri,alongwithmirrorimageofharddiskExh.4,Exh.6to
12,Exh.14to17,Exh.18,Exh.19,Exh.20/3,Exh.20/4,Exh.20/5at
Exh.373 and alsoissuedletterdt 5102013inrespectofcopyof
Exh.5,Exh.21,Exh.22,Exh.23,Exh.24toSDPOAheriatExh.374and
thereafter,heprovidedalldatapresentintheexhibitsprovidedtothe
investigating officer in Annexure harddisk marked as Annexure
harddiskCy47513alongwithreportgeneratedbyhimdated152
2014 vide O.W.no. 4860/2014. He statedthat on 1522014one
sealedparcelcontainingonememorycardof16GB,onereport,one
Annexureharddiskandattestedhardcopies(15pages)werehanded
overtoP.W.7ApekshaRamteke,LPCandthosewerereceivedbyher
asperreceiptandsealofofficeofCFSLKalina.Heidentifiedreport
dated1522014andhardcopiesof15pagesatExh.266. Onthe
same day he handed over one sealed plastic box containing 24
separatesealedparcelsandonesealedparcelcontaininglaptop,one
sealed report, one Annexure harddisk, attested hard copies (247
pages)toP.W.7ApekshaRamteke,LPCBuckle no.4131.Thereport
dated1522014containing247pagesannexedtoExh.267.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
201 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

295] HestatedthatHardcopiesofAnnexurestoExh.267were
provided to him by letter from SDPO Aheri on 3012014 and
thereafterbasedoncontentspresentkeywordsweregeneratedand
based on file path provided by Investigating Officer P.W.11 SDPO
Aheriandtheconcerneddocumentsweresearchedandverifiedand
providedinhardcopiesandattestedandthereafter,asperrequestof
SDPOAheribyletterdated1032016, CFSLofficehas provided
certificatedated2232016videO.W.no.989/2016undersec.65(b)
of Indian Evidence Act and it was countersigned by our Head of
Department, Asst. Director of Cyber crime department Mrs.
C.S.Kamat.Thesaidcertificatedt.2232016bearshissignatureand
signature of Mrs. C.S. Kamat, Asst. Director Forensic Science
Laboratory,HomeDepartment,GovernmentofMah.Mumbaiwhichis
atExh.375andbythiscertificate,hecertifiedthatExhibitsinCr.no.
3017/2013 of Aheri P.S.were received in CFSL Mumbaion 308
2013 and 1792013. He stated that he analysed the exhibits and
preparedthereportasperCFSLstandardoperatingprocedureand
thereafter,analysisreport,annexureharddisk,annexurehardcopies
(247 pages annexed to report Exh.267 and 15 pages annexed to
reportExh.266)furnishedwhichwerepreparedbyhimusingCFSL
computer.

296] He stated that the path is marked on some of the

documentsannexedtoExh.267.Forexampleoneletterdated279
2002 Investigating Officer noted salutation dear comrades thereon
andsomeofthedocumentisnotgivenpathandinrespectofthose
documentsheappliedfollowingprocedure.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
202 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

i] ByOCR (opticalcharacterrecognition)andindexinghe
preparedsoftcopyofhardcopiesprovidedtohimandheprepared
keywordsbasedonuniquewordsperpageandsearchedcompletein
data set. After processing the respective search hits were visually
analysedandcomparedpersonallywiththehardcopiesprovidedby
investigatingofficervideExh.267.

ii] SoalsoinrespectofExh.266(15pages)hefollowedthe
sameprocedure.For CBIR(contentbasedimageretrieval) images
prepared and index was performed and then they were compared
withthehardcopiesprovidedtohim.HecheckedExh.266and267
fromtheoriginalharddiscprovidedbytheinvestigatingofficer.

Hestatedthatauthorofeveryfileisametadataproperty
fileanditisinthenameofprofilesystem.

297] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel. Inhiscrossexamination,headmittedthathewasserving
oncontractbasisinCFSLandeveryyearthereisanadvertisementof
recruitment in CFSL Mumbai and after submission of application
personsareappointedafter2to3monthsandhedoesnotremember
thedatewhentheadvertisementgivenbyCFSLKalinaMumbai.He
admitted that ENCASE software is a license software and CFSL
Mumbai having ENCASE software ofitsown.He admittedthat he
does not have any information regarding to the license of Encase
softwareandhasnotbroughtcopyofthesaidlicneceandhedoesnot
haveanyinformation inrespectofissuanceoftenderinrespectof
EnCasesoftware. HeadmittedthatM.K.MalvewastheirDirector
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
203 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

and he cannot identify his signature. He admitted that the

informationregardingtheissueoftenderisavailableoninternetbut
hewasnotabletosubmitthesametothecourt.

298] He admitted that there is book in respect of ENCASE

Computer Forensics, The official Encase Certified examiner Study
guidesoftware and thesaidbookisalsoavailableoninternetand
from this software paperless report is generated. He admitted that
Exhs.266and267arenotthepaperlessreportofEncasesoftwareand
theEncasereportispreparedintext,RTF, HTML,XML,XLS,XLSX,
CSVandPDFformat.HeadmittedthatreportExh.266and267are
in XLS format. He admitted that the report is generated in XLS
format,however,asthesizeofthedocumentwasmoretoprovideit
inhardcopy,sothefinalreportsareprovidedinXLSformat,butfinal
reportsareprovidedintextformattofileinthecourt.Headmitted
thatOCRandCBIRfacilitiesarenotavailableinencasesoftwareand
in report Exhs.266 and 267 there is no mention of any software
exceptencasesoftware.Headmittedthatencasesoftwarebelongsto
Guidancecompanyandsaidcompanygivescertifiedtrainingcourse
forexaminationofdocumentsbyusingencasesoftwareandhedoes
notknowwhetherthereare61personsasdocumentexaminersin
India and he did not go through the examination prescribed by
guidancecompanyforexaminationofdocuments.

299] He admitted that in computer system's the time, date

settingcanbechangedbyenteringtheBiossetupandwhentheygo
throughthebiossetupthenthereisentrycreatedintheeventlogby
system. Hevoluntarilystatedthatifthedocumentiscopiedinthe
same drive, for example, C drive then created date, last modified
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
204 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

date,lastexcessdatewillremainsameandifthesamedocumentis
copiedfromonedrivetoanotherdriveforexampleCdrivetoDdrive,
thenonlycreateddateschange,andlastmodified,lastaccessdate
willremainsame.Headmittedthatifthedateandtimeischanged
byenteringintoBiossetupthenanynewdocumentcreatedwould
have meta data similar to system date and one can remove the
personalinformationandpropertiesandalsotheauthor'sname,title
anddatealsocanbechangedbyenteringintothepropertiesofthe
computer.HeadmittedthatthepaperlessreportgeneratedbyEncase
softwareisnotfiledonrecord.Headmittedthatthereisnocopyof
EncasereportbutthereiscopyoffiledetailsexportedbyEncaseand
he has not mentioned the system details in his report in which
Exh.266 and 267 are generated and in Encase software separate
reportofHashvalueisgenerated.

300] HeadmittedthatinhisreportExh.266&267thereisno
mention of matching of hash value and there is no mention of
matchingofhashvaluebyEncasesoftware.Hevoluntarilystatedthat
acquisitionlog,verificationreportandotherprocessesfollowedi.e.
hashing log, file signatures matching log, filter run log, etc. are
generatedonlyforofficecopypurpose.Headmittedthatnosuchlogs
arementionedinreportasperthecurrenttemplateofthereportnor
providedtotheInvestigatingOfficerifrequestedsaiddocumentcan
beprovidedanduniquehashvalueisgeneratedforeveryevidenceor
digitalmediaacquired.Headmittedthathedidnotfilethesoftcopy
prepared from the hard copies provided to him by investigating
officerwithrespectto247pagesand15pageswhicharethepartof
Exh.267and266respectivelyandinhisreportthereisnoreference
ofprocessfollowedbyhimregardingOCRandCBIRandpreparing
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
205 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

softcopiesandthemetadataofthefileisvulnerabletoanychanges
orediting.Hevoluntarilystatedthatsuchchangescanbeidentified
andcorrected.Headmittedthathashvalueisnotmentionedinthe
harddiskof1TBmentionedinreportExh.266.

301] In his crossexamination, he denied that they have not

beenprovidedtheEncasereportgeneratedbyEncasesoftware.He
voluntarilystatedthatallthereportsgeneratedbyEncasesoftware
areprovidedseparatelyindigitalmediaandnoteforthesameisalso
mentionedintheendofthereportasthesedocumentsprovidedare
parts of report. He denied that as they were not having encase
software they had not generated the said report through encase
software.HedeniedthatifanyonegothroughBiossetup,dateand
time ischangedincomputerthenifacopyofdocumentgenerated
whichisalreadyexistsinthecomputerbeforethechangesofsystem
datebyenteringintoBiossetupcannotchangethelastaccessdate
andlastmodifieddatebutwillchangethecreateddate.Hedenied
thathedidnotuseEncasesoftwareandhence,thepaperlessreport
generatedthroughEncasesoftwareisnotfiledonrecordandhedid
notgothroughEncasesoftwareatanypointoftime.Hedeniedthat
hedidnotfollowtheOCRandCBIRprocessandheblindlysignedon
Exhs.266and267ontheinstructionsofMr.Bawcheandsigned247
pagesand15pages. HedeniedthathewasnotworkinginCFSL
KalinaMumbaihence,hedidnotprepare saidreportandallhard
copiesandsoftcopieswerepreparedbyShriBawcheandhedoesnot
know anything about the case and he is deposing falsely at the
instanceofP.W.23S.D.P.O.ShriDhumal.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
206 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

302] Hedeniedthathedeposedfalselythathereceivedletter
on2582013alongwithone16GBmemorycard,onwhichSandisk
microHBcapacity16GBwaswrittenanditwasreceivedinhisoffice
on 3082013, when the memory card is received it wasin sealed
condition alongwith letter dated 2582013 and he received
questionnairefromtheI.O.andthesealwasopenedinfrontofhis
HeadofdepartmentShriMawale.Hedeniedthathedidnotreceive
letterdated1492013issuedbyI.O.SDPOAheriandoneboxwas
providedcontaining24sealedpackets,onemoresealedparcelandsix
blankharddiskwerealsoprovidedandhedidnotreceivethesaid
property in his office on 1792013. He denied that after it was
receivedon1792013,thesealswereopenedinfrontofHeadofthe
department and Exhibits numbers were marked to the exhibits
providedbyinvestigatingofficeranddescriptionoftheexhibitswas
mentionedinthedescriptionbookoftheCFSLlaband anentrytothat
effectwasmadeinCFSLrecordbookandexhibitswereagainsealed
inforensicsealandkeptinsafecustodyofHeadoftheDepartment.

303] In this case, after completing the crossexamination by

defence, the question was asked on behalf of the Court that
WhetherExh.1isaoriginalmemorycardandExh.1to25contains
alltheelectronicdigitalstoragemedialikependrives,CDS,DVDs,
memorycards,laptopsharddisks,etc.whichcontainsdocumentfiles,
mediai.e.audio,video?andWhatyoucansayabouttheoriginal
existence of the file in text visual, audio and video format in the
abovefilesandchangesoccurringinthesame?

304] Inreplytothesaidquestion,thiswitnessansweredthat
hedidnotobserveanysuchchanges,additionortamperingrelated
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
207 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

to the files present in the exhibit provided and based on file

signatures analysis, link file analysis, prefetch analysis, system
information,MFTdetails,registryanalysis,timestampanalysisand
USB analysis, he came to the conclusion that there are no such
changesintext,audioandvideo.

305] Infurthercrossexaminationbydefenceheadmittedthat
hehasnotmentionedinhisreportsatExh.266and267thathehad
followedtheprocessasdeposedinanswertocourtquestionbuthe
deniedthathedid notmentionit,ashedidnotfollowtheabove
process.Headmittedthatthereisnoreporteitherintheformofsoft
or hard copy showing whether there is a tampering or not in the
electronic gadget containing electronic record like pendrive, CDs,
VCDs,memorycard,etc.Hevoluntarilystatedthatincasehewould
have come across any such alteration, he would have mentioned
aboutthesameinthereport.

306] This witness was recalled for crossexamination as per

order passed below application at Exh.467 filed by Shri Gadling
Advocate for the accused and he was crossexamined by Advocate
Shri Gwalwansh on behalf of the accused. During his cross
examinationheadmittedthatthecreateddateandtimewillbesame
asdateofsystemdateandtimeandonlycreateddatewillbesameas
thatofsystem'sdateandtime.Headmittedthatdetailsofcomputer
systemisnotmentionedinhiscertificatesatExh.266and267where
theanalysiswasmadeandhedoesnotknowwhethertheheadof
CFSL,MumbaiKalinaisofficerintherankofIPSandhedoesnot
knowwhethertheCFSLismanagedbypolicedepartment.Hefurther
stated that his initial posting in CFSL Software Assistant Chemical
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
208 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Analyzer for first year and for last two years he was working as
ScientificOfficerandinCFSLatCyberDivisionwherehewasposting
no posts are permanent but all are on contract basis and Uttara
Gawand was also on temporary post. He stated that Assistant
Directorwasassignedworktothemandtherewasnospecialorderof
Government of Maharashtra for analysis of digital evidence in this
case and there was no specific order in favour of him to examine
digital evidence. He denied that in ENCASE software, format is
providedforsavingthereport.

307] ThiswitnesswasreexaminedbythelearnedSpl.P.P.Shri
Sathainathanandduringhisreexaminationthiswitnessstatedthat
he has passed Bachelor of Engineering from Padmabhushan
Vasantdada Patil College of Engineering in 2009 from Mumbai
University with First Class and delivered lectures as an Expert in
MaharashtraJudicialAcademytoJudges,policeofficersasanExpert.
Hestatedthatduetofamilyreasonssince2009to2011hewasnot
workinganywhereandon6thMarch2011hejoinedForensicScience
Laboratory,Mumbaiforaperiodofoneyearoncontractbasisandhis
Contractwasrenewedfrom25thJune2012to24thJune2013and
thereafterfrom30thAugust2013to12thAugust2014. Hestated
thatheishavingexperiencecertificateforworkinginCFSLandhe
filedonrecordcopiesofhisexperiencecertificate,qualificationsand
participation letter in seminars vide Exh.470. He stated that in
between March 2012 to June 2012 and from 24th June to 30th
August 2014 he was working as Forensic Analyst in Lab System
PrivateLimitedasForensicAnalystinprivateSectorandfromApril
2015hejoinedDeloitIndiaCompany.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
209 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

308] He stated that during his tenure as Forensic Expert he

handledapproximately189caseswhichincludeddigitalevidencefiles
like CDs, DVDs, pendrives, memorycards, magnetic tape, hard
drives,servers,mobiles,tabletsandotherdigitalstoragemedaisand
besidesthiscasehehadgivenevidenceasaForensicExpertinmore
than40casesandhehadgivenevidenceinSessionscourt,Dapoli,
Mumbai, Dhule, Gondiya, Shirdi, Pune. Mohadi rape case is a
landmarkcase.Hestatedthatheiscertifiedaccesscertifiedexaminer
(ACE)andaccessdatamobileexaminer(AME).Withrespecttocourt
question,heansweredthattherewasnoalterationandchangeinthe
text,audioandvideoformintheelectronicdevicesprovidedtohim
inthiscaseandheansweredonthebasisofchemicalanalysisdone
byhimforconcludingthesameandheconductedthefollowingtest
forcomingtotheaboveconclusion:
i]Filesignatureanalysismeansheaderandfooterofthefile
extension in exa decimal. For each file in evidence those file
signaturesarecomparedwiththeidealfilesignatureavailableforthat
fileextension. Iftheydonotmatch,theerrorisobservedandthe
concernedfilewillbeconvertedtotheoriginalfilesignature.
ii] Linkfileanalysiswhenafileisexecutedatemporaryfile
with same contents and properties is open in background. From
whichwecanstatewhichfileisopenedoraccessed.
iii] Prefetch analysis when a software is executed in
backgroundaprefetchfileforthatsoftwareisopened. Fromthose
wecanconcludewhichsoftwareswereexecuted.
iv] System information This provides the information
regardinginstallationformatingalastshutdowndateofthesystem.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
210 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

v] MFTdetailsthisprovidesdetailsregardingcreationof
partitionavailableinevidence.
vi] Registryanalysisthisprovideinformationsifanyregistry
filehasbeentamperedorvaluehasbeenchanged.
vii] Time stamp analysis depending on the time zone
availableintheevidencesystem.Thetimezoneisconvertedintoreal
timeISTtimezoneanddetailsofdatecreated,datemodified,date
accessed,datewrittenofthefilearecalculated.
viii] USB analysis this provides information regarding
removablestoragemediaconnectedwiththesystem.

309] He stated that all the analysis is done by ENCASE

Software and on that basis he gave answers to the Court. For
exampleinExh.267pageno.5inthelastcolumnattheendthereis
mentionofa77d51cdd3a18c32bb95653110086cfaisahashvalueof
thatexhibiti.e. harddisk. Hestatedthatwhileexaminingthesaid
hashvalueforforensicanalysistheyusedwriteblockerstocreatean
imageoftheevidenceandbythatprocesshashvalueoftheexhibit
i.e.harddiskisnotchange.Hestatedthatatthetimeofanalysishe
candetectlastaccessmadeintheexhibits(harddisks). Hestated
thatatpageno.7ofhisreportExh.267heprovidedoperatingsystem
details, user details, installed softwares, hardware connected and
internethistoryofExh.25(laptop).

310] He stated that in the last column shut down time is

mentionedas982013andthislastshutdowncannotbechangedof
the deviceunlessanduntilitisagainrestartedandshutdown. He
stated that as Exh.25 is a laptopit isaoperatingsoftware system
hence this analysis is done but with respect to other devices CDs,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
211 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

DVDs,pendrives,harddisksthesearenothavingoperatingsoftware
systemandthereforeonthebasisofprocedureofMFTanalysisany
change,alterationcanbedetermined.Hestatedthathehasgiventhe
report in soft copy i.e. paper less report with the help of Encase
software in the harddisk marked as Annexure harddiskCy47413
andinthenoteno.1ofhisreportExh.267hehasgivendetailsofsaid
harddisk which is make of western digital, capacity of 2 TB with
modelnumberandserialnumberaspartofhisreport.

311] This witness was further crossexamined by defence

Advocateandduringcrossexaminationheadmittedthathedidnot
mention in Exh.267 and in certificate 65B about the procedure
followedbyhimasdeposedregardingfilesystemetc.Headmitted
thathehasnotbroughthisappointmentletter.Hedeniedthathedid
notmakeanyanalysisinthiscaseandhewasnotworkinginCFSL
duringtheperiod6thMarch2011to24thJune2013andhewasnot
appointedduringthatperiodinCFSL,Mumbai.

312] Afterexaminationof16GBmemorycardandarticlenos.1
to41thoseweresentbackbyCFSLBombaytoPolicestationAheriby
P.W. No.21 Bhavesh Nikam through carrier P.W.5 Police Constable
Ravindra Kumbhare and Woman Police Constable P.W.7 Apeksha
Ramteke.

Argument of learned Spl. P.P. Shri Sathainathan in respect of

examination of 16 GB memorycard of Sandisk Company and
Electronic gadgets CDs, DVDS, pendrives, harddisks (Arts.1to
41).
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
212 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

313] ThelearnedSpl.P.P.Sathainathan submittedthat16GB

memorycardofSandiskcompanywhichwasseizedfromthepersonal
search of accused no.3 Hem Mishra vide seizure panchanama
(Exh.137)wassenttoCFSL,Mumbaiforexaminationthroughcarrier
P.W.5 Ravindra Kumbhare vide letter Exh.211dated25.8.2013and
CFSL Scientific Expert P.W.21 Bhavesh Nikam examined the same.
ThehardcopiesofthedocumentscertifiedbyP.W.21BhaveshNikam
arefiledonrecordatArt.A17toA21alongwithCFSLreportExh.266.

314] HesubmittedthatalltheelectronicgadgetsArt.1to41
likeCDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisksseizedfromthehousesearch
ofaccusedno.6SaibabaweresenttoCFSL,Bombaythroughcarrier
Ravindra Kumbhare (P.W.5) by letter Exh.212 dated 14.9.2013 for
examination and for getting mirrorimagesandanalysisreport and
initiallyharddiskwasreceivedbyP.W.11SuhasBawchefromCFSL,
Mumbaiandpanchanamatothateffectwaspreparedon23.9.2013
vide Exh.204 and he further receivedanother harddisk containing
mirrorimagesofelectronicdataandpanchanamatothateffectwas
preparedon7.10.2013videExh.205andboththeharddiskswere
broughtbycarrierP.W.5RavindraKumbhareandafterreceiptofboth
theharddisksandafterviewingthemirrorimagesinsoftcopiesof
harddisks supplied by CFSL, Mumbai printouts of incriminating
documents were taken out by Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas
BawcheinpresenceofpanchwitnessP.W.4ShrikantGaddewarand
thoseprintoutsweresenttoCFSL,Mumbaiforcertificationbyletter
dated 17.11.2013 (Exh.261) and letter dated 30.1.2014 (Exh.263)
and by that time original electronic gadgets Arts.1 to 41 i.e. CDs,
DVDs,pendrives,harddisksseizedfromthehousesearchofaccused
no.6 Saibaba and 16 GB memorycard of Sandisk company seized
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
213 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

fromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishra werewithCFSL,
Mumbai.

315] Thereafter, in response to letter (Exh.263), the CFSL,

Mumbaicertifiedallthehardcopiesofmirrorimagesandthosewere
senttoP.W.11SuhasBawchealongwithanalysisreports(Exh.266and
267)andthisfactisstatedbyScientificExpertP.W.21BhaveshNikam
inhisexaminationatparano.4,5and6.Hesubmittedthatfromthe
evidenceofP.W.21BhaveshNikamitrevealsthaton30.8.2013his
officereceivedonesealedparcelcontainingonememorycardof16
GBandon15.2.2014hehandedoveronesealedparcelcontaining
said16GBmemorycard,onereportatExh.266,oneAnnexurehard
diskandattestedhardcopies(15pages)toP.W.7ApekshaRamteke,
LPC. He submitted that on 1522014 one sealed plastic box
containing 24 separate sealed parcels and one sealed parcel
containinglaptop,onesealedreportatExh.267,oneAnnexurehard
disk,attestedhardcopies(247pages)werehandedovertoApeksha
Ramteke,LPC.

ArgumentofAdvocateShriGadlingfortheaccused

316] The defence has further attacked on the evidence of

ScientificExpertP.W.21BhaveshNikamonthegroundthatheisnot
expertwitnessandhewasnotappointedbyCFSL,Mumbaiandhe
didnotcarryoutanyexamination. Further,ithascomeonrecord
thathedidnotundergotrainingofEnCasesoftwareandhehasgiven
differentversionsatdifferentstages.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
214 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

317] The learned Advocate Shri Gadling further argued that

paperless report generated by EnCase Software of softcopies and
hardcopies are not produced on record and the same has been
admittedbyScientificExpertP.W.21BhaveshNikam.Hence,evidence
ofScientificExpertP.W.21BhaveshNikamisnotworthtoberelied
upon. On this point defence relied on the crossexamination of
Scientific Expert P.W.21 Bhavesh Nikam in which he admitted that
EnCase software belongs to Guidance company and said company
givescertifiedtrainingcourseforexaminationofdocumentsbyusing
encase software and he has not gone through the examination
prescribedbyguidancecompanyforexaminationofdocuments.But
incrossexaminationthiswitnesshasclearlydeniedthefactthathe
did not use EnCase software and hence, the paperless report
generatedthroughEncasesoftwareisnotfiledonrecord.Insupport
of his submission he placed reliance on the judgment of
Rameshchandra Agrawal Vrs Regency Hospital Limited and
Others,reportedin(2009)9SupremeCourtcases709whereinit
isobservedthat

E.EvidenceAct,1872S.45 Expertevidence
AdmissibilityRequirementEvidenceofexpertis
admissiblewhen(I)expertisheard,(ii)hemustbe
within a recognised field of expertise, (iii) his
evidencemustbebasedonreliableprinciples,and
(iv) he must be qualified in that discipline
Reiterated,withoutexaminingexpertasawitness,
no reliance can be placed on his opinion alone
(Paras16,21and22)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
215 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

318] Percontra,onthispointSpl.P.P.submittedthatprosecution
filedapplicationforgettingtheestimateandtenderofCFSLBombay.
ThisshowsthatexaminationwasdonethroughEnCasesoftwareand
thereisnocontentionofthedefencethattheexaminationwasdone
throughEncasesoftwareandevidenceofthiswitnesscouldnotbe
disbelievedmerelybecausethepaperlessreportisnotfiledonrecord.

CONCLUSION

319] It is important tonotethat P.W.21BhaveshNikamhas

carriedouttheexaminationofelectronicgadgetsArts.1to41CDs,
DVDs,pendrives,harddisksallegedlyseizedfromthehousesearch
ofaccusedno.6Saibabaand16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompany
allegedlyseizedfromthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.3HemMishra
by using EnCase software version and as application filed by the
defenceatExh.467theprosecutionhasfiledonrecordthedocuments
fromCFSL,Mumbai.Theimportantdocumentsare[1]Experience
certificateofP.W.21BhaveshNikamstatingthathewasworkingwith
CFSL,MumbaiasAssistantChemicalAnalyzerfrom17thMarch2011
to16thMarch2012andthereafterfrom25.6.2012to24.6.2013and
from 30.8.2013 to 12.8.2014 he was working as Scientific Officer.
[2]AppointmentOrderofP.W.21BhaveshNikam CFSL,Mumbaiis
dated 30.8.2013 and he received the said appointment order on
4.9.2013 and examinationofelectronicdeviceswascarriedoutby
himon 19.9.2013. Thisshowsthatatthetimeofexaminationof
electronicdevicesP.W.21BhaveshNikamwaspresentintheofficeof
CFSL,Mumbai.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
216 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

320] FurthertherearedocumentsshowingthatP.W.21Bhavesh
Nikam conducted Seminar in the College of Engineering and
deliveredlecturesinMaharashtraJudicialAcademytoJudges,police
officers as an Expert. The document no.6 filed below the list at
Exh.474 shows the supply of EnCase software for cyber forensic
systembyM/sLabSystem(I)Pvt.Ltd.asperthedemandofCFSL,
Kalina,Mumbaiandanotherdocumentshowsthatthequotationof
tenderofEncasesoftwarewasprovidedbyM/sLabSystems(I)Pvt.
Ltd.toCFSL,MumbaiandthepricewasmentionedasRs.64,02,900/
andhenceitrevealsthatEnCasesoftwarewasavailablewithCFSL,
Mumbai.FurtherdocumentatSerialno.5oflistofdocumentfiledby
the prosecution at Exh.474 it is mentioned the version of EnCase
software is 6.19.7.2 and name ofthe owner ismentioned asLab
Systems India Pvt.Ltd., on the other hand, in report at Exh.267
versionofEnCasesoftwareusedismentionedas6.19and7.09and
nameofownerisCFSL,Mumbai.ThisshowsthatversionofEnCase
software was used for examination of electronic data. The tender
noticeclearlymentionedthesaidversion. P.W.21BhaveshNikamin
hisexaminationinchiefstatedabouthiseducationandqualification
that he passed Bachelor of Engineering from Padmabhushan
Vasantdada Patil College of Engineering in 2009 from Mumbai
University with First Class and having experience certificate for
workinginCFSLandbesidesthiscasehehadgivenevidenceasa
ForensicExpertinmorethan40casesandhehadgivenevidencein
Sessions court, Dapoli, Mumbai, Dhule, Gondiya, Shirdi, Pune.
Mohadirapecaseisalandmarkcaseandhefiledonrecordcopiesof
hisexperiencecertificate,qualifications,copiesofcourtsummonsand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
217 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

attendance certificates and participation letter in seminars vide

Exh.470 as above and no suggestions were made during cross
examinationofScientificExpertP.W.21BhaveshNikambydefence
abouttheeducation,qualificationandhisexperienceandthefactthat
he has given evidence in several cases. Hence, in view of the
Judgmentof
ApexCourt
inthecaseof
SarwanSinghvStateof

PunjabreportedinAIR2002SupremeCourt3652 whereinitis
heldthat

(B) Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 137 Cross

examinationOpponentdecliningtoavailhimself
ofopportunitytoputhiscaseincrossexamination
Evidence tendered on that issue ought to be
accepted.(Para8).

321] Hence,inviewofabove,asthedefencedeclinedtocross
examinethewitnessonthepointofhisqualificationandeducation,
ongoingthroughthecertificatesofP.W.21BhaveshNikamaboutthe
factthathewasservinginCFSL,Mumbaiandhehasgivenevidence
in several important cases, shows that he is an expert witness in
electronicequipmentashewasElectronicEngineerandhehaspassed
BachelorofEngineeringinMay2009intheFirstClassandthereafter
he applied for the post Scientific Expert and he was appointed by
letterdated30.8.2013whichwasreceivedbyhimon4.9.2013andto
that effect appointment order is very clear but merely because he
admitted that he has not undergone the training it cannot be
disbelievedthathedidnotcarryouttheexaminationofelectronic
databyusingEncasesoftware.Hedeniedthathedidnotgothrough
Encasesoftwareatanypointoftime.Hedeniedthathedidnotuse
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
218 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Encase software and no paperless report was generated in Encase

software.Itisimportanttonotethatitisnotdisputedbythedefence
thatCFSL,Mumbaididnotconductexaminationofelectronicgadgets
byusingEncasesoftware,butthereisadisputeonlyonthepointof
versionofsoftwareusedbyCFSL,Mumbai.Therelevantparaofthe
notesofargumentofdefencesideisreproducedasunder
B. ItisnotdisputedbythedefencethatCFSLdidnot
havelicenseofversion7.08ofEncasesoftwareasthe
nameofDirectorateofForensicScienceismentionedin
thelicenceofEncasesoftware.Herethesubmissionof
thedefenceisthattheExaminationreportEXH266&
267waspreparedbyversion7.09andthedefenceis
not disputing this fact also. But the objection of the
defence is that with the licensed version of 7.08 of
EncasesoftwarenoexaminationwasconductedbyPW
21. Because by their own admission the prosecution
had mentioned in the examination report itself that
tests were performed on Version 7.09 of Encase
software.

322] ThelearnedAdvocateShriGadlingforaccusedsubmitted
thatintheexaminationreportEXH266&267underthetitleTESTS
CONDUCTEDthatReadingcontentsofmemorycardusingEncase
Version6.19and7.09ofGuidanceSoftwareInc.,USA. Butbybare
perusalofdocumentno.5submittedbytheprosecutionon9.1.2017it
appears that CFSL does not have the license of above mentioned
version of Encase Software. In Document No.5 in the programme
columnat2nd lastboxthenameofthelicenseholderismentioned
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
219 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

which is Lab Systems IndiaPvt Ltd.It suggeststhat the license of

version 6.19.7.2 isin the name ofLabSystemsIndiaPvtLtd. He
submittedthatastheLabSystemsIndiaPvtLtdisthedistributorof
EncasesoftwareinIndia,thatiswhythenameofthedistributoris
mentionedinthecolumn.Ifwebelieveontheprosecutionstorythan
thenameofLabSystemsIndiaPvtLtdshouldhavealsoappearedon
thenextpage,whichisthedocumentofLicenserelatedtoversion
7.08.01.27 but contrary to the claim of the prosecution there is
mentionofDirectorateofForensicScienceinthecolumnName.Is
DirectorateofForensicscienceadistributorofEncasesoftwaretoo?
This in itself has contradicted the story of the prosecution and
strengthentheclaimofthedefencethattheCFSLMumbaididnot
havethelicenseofversion6.19.7.2. Soitisproperheretosubmit
thatnoexaminationEXH266&267wasperformedbyCFSLorPW
21byversion6.19ofEncasesoftware.Onthebasisofabove,itwas
arguedthatnoexaminationreportwaspreparedEXH266&267by
PW21byapplyingversion6.19&7.09ofEncasesoftware.

323] Itisimportanttonotethatfromthedocumentscontained
in16GBmemorycardandelectronicdataintheformoftext,audio
andvideocontainedinArticles1to41CDs,DVDs,pendrives,hard
disksandhisevidenceshowsthathecarriedoutfollowingtests

1] File signature, means header and footer of the file

extension in exa decimal. For each file in evidence those file
signatures are compared with the ideal file signature available for
thatfileextension.Iftheydonotmatchtheerrorisobservedandthe
concernedfilewillbeconvertedtotheoriginalfilesignature.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
220 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

2] Linkfileanalysis:Whenafileisexecutedatemporary
filewithsamecontentsandpropertiesisopeninbackground.
Fromwhichwecanstatewhichfileisopenedoraccessed.

3] Prefetch analysis : When a software is executed in

backgroundaprefetchfileforthatsoftwareisopened. From
thosewecanconcludewhichsoftwareswereexecuted.

4] System information : This provides the information

regarding installation formatingalast shutdown date ofthe
system.

5] MFTdetails:Thisprovidesdetailsregardingcreationof
partitionavailableinevidence.

6] Registry analysis : This provide informations if any

registryfilehasbeentamperedorvaluehasbeenchanged.

7] Time stamp analysis : Depending on the time zone

availableintheevidencesystem. Thetimezoneisconverted
intorealtimeISTtimezoneanddetailsofdatecreated,date
modified,dateaccessed,datewrittenofthefilearecalculated.

8] USB analysis : This provides information regarding

removablestoragemediaconnectedwiththesystem.

324] Bhavesh (P.W.21) in his crossexamination has given

details about the fact how he came to the conclusion about the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
221 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

existenceoforiginalfilesintextvisuals,audioandvideoformatinthe
above files and the Court question to that effect was put to this
witness.Thesamequestionisreproducedasunder

CourtquestionExh.1isaoriginalmemorycardand
Exh.1to25containsalltheelectronicdigitalstorage
medialikependrives, CDS, DVDs, memory cards,
laptopsharddisks,etc.whichcontainsdocumentfiles,
mediai.e.audio,video.Whatyoucansayaboutthe
originalexistenceofthefileintextvisual,audioand
videoformatintheabovefilesandchangesoccurring
inthesame?

Ans: I,didnotobserveanysuchchanges,additionor
tampering related to the files present in the exhibit
provided. Based on file signatures analysis, link file
analysis, prefetch analysis,system information,MFT
details,registryanalysis,timestampanalysis and
USBanalysis,Icametotheconclusionthatthereare
nosuchchangesintext,audioandvideo.

325] Further in the crossexamination of P.W.21 Bhavesh

questionwasaskedtohimaboutthechangingofdateandtimeinthe
fileandhehasgivendetailsaboutthesame.Thesaidquestionsand
answersarereproducedasunder
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
222 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Que:Ifthesystem'date'and'time'ischangedandfile
iscopiedorcreated,thenwhatwillbe'createddate'
and'time'ofthefile?
Ans:Thecreateddateandtimewillbesameasdate
ofsystemdateandtime.

Que :Ifthesystemdateandtimeischangeandif
somethingisdownloadfromtheInternetwhatwillbe
theeffectofthat?
Ans : Only created date will be same as that of
system'sdateandtime.

Que:InENCASEsoftwarereportareportissavedi.e.
there is format in that software and report will be
saved in that format only particularly in ENCASE
software?
Ans:NottruetosaythatinENCASEsoftwareformat
isprovidedforsavingthereport.

Testconducted
326] Reading contents of memory card using Encase Version
6.19andVersion7.09ofGuidanceSoftwareInc.,USA.

Testconducted
327] Readingcontentsofharddisks,CDs,DVDs,pendrivesand
memory cards using Encase Version 6.19 and Version 7.09 of
GuidanceSoftwareInc.,USA.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
223 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

328] InviewofthisitcanbeconcludedthatP.W.21Bhavesh
Nikam is a expert in examination of electronic evidence and he
carriedouttheexaminationofseizedelectronicgadgetsi.e.16GB
memorycardandArt.1to41withthehelpofEncasesoftwareand
thishasbeenreflectedinreportatExh.266.

Absenceofnotifiedexamineranditseffectundersection79Aof
theInformationTechnologyAct,2000

329] Defencefurthersubmittedthatthereisnothingonrecord
toshowthatCFSLMumbaiisauthorizeddepartmenttoexaminethe
electronicdata u/s 79A. There isnothingonrecordtoshowthat
CFSL,Mumbaiisnotifiedasanexaminerforelectronicevidenceas
requiredu/s79A.

330] To appreciate the rival contention of the parties it is

necessary to produce the provisions of Section 79A of Information
TechnologyAct.

79A.CentralGovernmenttonotifyExaminerofelectronic
evidence The Central Government may, for the purpose of
providing expert opinion on electronic form evidence before any
Courtorotherauthorityspecify,byNotificationintheofficialGazette,
anyDepartment,bodyoragencyoftheCentralGovernmentoraState
GovernmentasanExaminerofElectronicEvidence.

Explanation:ForthepurposeofthisSection,electronicform
evidence means any information of probative value that is either
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
224 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

stored or transmitted in electronic form and includes computer

evidence, digital audio, digital video, cell phones, digital fax
machines.

331] Ongoingthroughthesaidprovisionsitisclearthatthey
aredirectoryandnotmandatory. Atthisjuncture,itisnecessaryto
considertheratiolaiddownbytheMadrasHighCourtinthecaseof
K.RamajayamVsInspectorofPolice,Chennaireportedin2016
Cr.LJ1542.Inpara25observedthat
Itisaxiomaticthattheopinionofanexpert,which
isrelevantunderSection45oftheIndianEvidence
Act, 1872, when accepted by the Court graduates
into the opinion of the Court. The Central
Government has not yet issued notification under
Section 79A of the Information Technology Act,
2000onaccountofwhichSection45AoftheIndian
Evidence Act, 1872 remains mute. Therefore, the
methods evolved by Kala (PW23) and Pushparani
(PW24), Scientific Officers of the Tamil Nadu
Forensic Sciences Department to analyze and give
theiropinionsontheelectronicdata,arecorrectand
cannotbefaulted.

332] TheStateofMaharashtraissuedGovernmentResolution
of Home Depart, Government of Maharashtra no.FSL/0306/634/
Pra.Kra.231/Pol4, Mantralaya,Mumbai400032dated17thJuly
2006 in respect of authorization to Cyber Forensic Scientific
Laboratory, Mumbai to conduct test on Polygraphy, Brain finger
printing,narcoanalysis,cybercrime,tapeauthenticationandspeaker
identification and accordingly during investigation Scientific Expert
P.W.21BhaveshNikamconductedscientificexaminationofelectronic
gadgetsi.e.16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyandArts.1to41
CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisksseizedinthecrime.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
225 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

333] Hence,inviewofabovethereports(Exh.266andExh.
267) given by C.F.S.L.Mumbai and opinion therein about the
electronicdatacontainedin16GBmemorycardandArticles1to41
likeCDs,DVDs,pendrivesandharddiskscanbeconsidered.
334] Fromtheaboveitisclearthatfromthetimeofseizure
electronicgadgets16GBmemorycard ofSandiskcompanyseized
from possession of Hem Mishra and Articles CD, DVD, pendrive,
harddiskseizedfromthehousesearchofSaibabaweresealedafter
seizureofthesameandtilltheexaminationofabovegadgetsbyCFSL
expert, they were in sealed condition and P.W.21 Bhavesh Nikam
examinedthesame. Onexaminationhedidnotfindanychangein
theoriginalexistenceoffileintext,audioandvideoformandthe
certificateu/s.65BarefiledonrecordanditisatExh.266(inrespect
of16GBofSandiskCompanyseizedfromaccusedNo.3HemMishra)
andExh.267(inrespectofArt.1to41)

335] From the above, it is clear that the electronic data

containingin16G.B.memorycardandelectronicgadgetsarticle1to
41 CD, DVD, Pendrives, harddisk was not found tampered and
alteredatanypointoftime. Itisimportanttonotethatsuggestion
wasputtotheinformantP.W.6PSIAtulAvhadthatinMaoistgroup,
everypartymemberhasaliasnameandheadmittedthatnormally
theyusealiasname.Itiswellsettledthatwhenthesuggestionsare
giventothewitnessesandiftheyareadmitted,thenitconstitutesan
evidence and the fact is clear that in Maoist group members of
bannedorganizationusedpseudonameoraliasname.Itisimportant
tonotethatfromthedocumentsatpageno.17ofExh.267itisclear
thatPrakashisnothingbuttheaccusedno.6Saibabaandfromthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
226 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

contentsofthisletteritshowsthatPrakashwasnotwellandhefaced
severalproblemsduetohisphysicalinabilityanditisnotdisputed
that accused no.6 Saibaba is 90% disabled. The word physical
inabilityisrelatestohandicapconditionofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

336] FromthedocumentatArticle150writtenbyaccusedno.6
Saibaba addressed to Professor Anandkrishnan shows that he was
physicallyhandicappedpersonwithaseveredeformity(90%)andhis
both lower limbs were affected by polio in his childhood and he
cannotstandorwalkonhisownandhemovesinawheelchair.Had
the investigating officer wanted to tamper or alter the data in
electronicgadgets,hewouldnothaveincludedthedocumentinthe
nameofPrakash. Furtheratonetimethereisreferenceofnameof
Chetanasthealiasnameofaccusedno.6Saibabaandthisevident
fromthedocumentatArticle21foundinthe16GBmemorycard
seized from the personal search of accused no.3 Hem Mishra and
from the document Brief Review of FC containing eight pages
collectivelymarkedatExh.130AinwhichthenameChetanisused
inreferencetoaccusedno.6Saibaba.

337] There are personal communications of accused no.6

Saibaba in the form of emails and letters. They are i] a letter
writtenbyaccusedno.6SaibabatoProf.Anandakrishnan,Chairman
ofInquiryCommittee,CIEFL,HyderabadatArt.150,ii]Lettertothe
Principal, Ram Lal Anand College, University of Delhi at Art.151
where his daughter Manjira was studying, iii] Letter written by
accused no.6 Saibaba to Mr.Santosh Kumar Mishra, Narayana
Academy, Delhi at Art.152 about his daughter Manjira, iv] Letter
writtenbyVasanta,wifeofaccusedno.6SaibabatotheManagerSBI,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
227 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

DelhiUniversityBranchatArt.153aboutwronglydebitofRs.5000/
from her account, v] Letter written by accused no.6 Saibaba
addressedtoGirishSrinivasan,ResearchUnitforPoliticalEconomy,
Colaba, Mumbai at Art.154 about payment of issues of magazine
'AspectsofIndianEconomy'.

338] FurtherthereareseveralHindisongsinaudioandvideo
formandEnglishandHindimoviesaround100innumbersinthe
harddisk. Had there been any intention on the part of the
investigating officer formanipulatingandfabricatingtheelectronic
data,hewouldhavemanipulatedHindiandEnglishsongsinaudio
andvideoformandmoviesaround100innumbersintheharddisk.

339] Anotherimportantpointisthatfourharddiskwereseized
fromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaandoneharddiskwas
crashed and this is evident from the document at page no.17 of
Exh.267inwhichitismentionedthatPrakashfailedtofinalisethe
draftofprogrammeandwhenthedraftalmostfinalisedtheharddisk
ofPrakash'scomputergotcrashedandinCFSLreport(Exh.267)on
thelastpageitismentionedthatthedataintheharddiskinEx.1
couldnotbedetected.Thisshowsthattheaboveelectronicgadgets
Art.1to41wereseizedfromthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaand
hencetherewasnotamperingoralteration.

WhethercertificateunderSection65BoftheIndianEvidenceAct
is necessary when the electronic gadgets containing electronic
gadgets 16 GB memorycard and Arts.1 to 41 CDs, DVDs, pen
drives,harddisksareavailablebeforetheCourt?
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
228 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

340] Evenassumingforthesakeofargumentthattheevidence
ofScientificExpertP.W.21BhaveshNikamisexcludedforoneorthe
otherreason,itisimportanttonotethattheelectronicdatacontained
in16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthepersonal
searchofaccusedno.3HemMishraandArts.1to41CDs,DVDs,pen
drives, harddisk seized from the house search of accused no.6
SaibabaarebeforetheCourt.Atthisstageitisnecessarytoconsider
theratiolaiddowninthejudgmentofApexCourtinthecaseofP.V.
Anvarv.P.K.Basheer,MANU/SC/0834/2014whereinitisobserved
inparano.24that

"24.Thesituationwouldhavebeendifferenthadthe
appellant adduced primary evidence, by making
availableinevidence,theCDsusedforannouncement
andsongs.HadthoseCDsusedforobjectionablesongs
or announcements been duly got seized through the
policeorElectionCommissionandhadthesamebeen
usedasprimaryevidence,theHighCourtcouldhave
playedthesameincourttoseewhethertheallegations
weretrue.

Theabovedecisiondoesnotinanywayenhance
thecaseofthedefenceinasmuchas,inthelastline,
the Supreme Court has stated that, if an electronic
record as such is used as primary evidence under
Section62oftheIndianEvidenceAct,1872thesame
isadmissibleinevidence,withoutcompliancewiththe
conditionsinSection65BoftheEvidenceAct.

341] Further,theDivisionbenchofDelhiHighCourtincaseof
KishanTripathialiasKishanPaintervsStatereportedin2016(3)
ADR495heldthat
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
229 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Evidence Act (1 of 1872) S. 65B, 60 CCTV

footage Evidentiary value Murder of security
guardinfactoryEvidenceonrecordshowingthat
no one was watching CCTV footage when it was
being recorded and recording was result of
commands or instruction already given and
programmed Original hard disc therefore would
enjoyauniquepositionandcouldbereliedonas
primaryevidence.PenalCode(45of1860),S.300
(Paras13,14,15)

342] Further,theMadrasHighCourtin2016Cr.L.J.1542,in
thecaseofK.RamajayamaliasAppuVrsInspectorofPolice,Chennai,
para35,itisheldthat

We are aware that in many public and private

offices,thoughcomputersareoperatedbytheirstaff,
yetthemanningandmaintenanceofservers,where
thedataisactuallystoredisoutsourcedtoprivate
players like TCS, WIPRO etc. Under those
circumstances, it would suffice if Section 65B
certificate is obtained from the person, who is in
chargeoftheserveralbeitthefactthatheisnota
stafftotheparentorganization. Section65Bdoes
notrequirecertificationbyapublicauthorityunlike
cases of issuance of certified copy of public
document under sec 76 of Indian Evidence Act,
1872. Itisnotnecessaryineverycasetoexamine
the person who had given the 65B certificate as
witness before the trial Court, unless the Court
suspects the integrity of the electronic record i.e.
producedasevidence.Oneshouldbearinmindthat
adigitalimagecannotbemanipulatedeasily.Every
digitalimagehasametadatastoredinit.Themeta
dataarestructedascodeddata,whichgivesevery
imageitsowncharacter.Itshouldberememberthat
the certification under section 65B is not for
truthfulness of the content of the computer
generatedrecord,butitisessentiallyrelatedtothe
workingconditionofthecomputerfromwherethe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
230 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

storedrecordisproducedinatangibleformforthe
Courttoinspect.

Defencewillalwayscomplainofmanipulation,
but Court can reject fanciful objections bearing in
mindtheprincipleunderlinedinSection114ofthe
IndianEvidenceAct,1872.Deomnibusdubitandum
(doubt every thing) Philosophy may be road to
scientific dodiscoveries, burt not for judicial
enquiries, where perfect proof is utopion. The
celebrated Jurist late lamented Nani Palkhivala
commented.
OurLegalSystemhasmadelifetooeasyfor
criminalsandtoodifficultforlawabidingcitizens.A
touch here and pushthereandIndiamaybecome
ungovernable under the present constitutional set
up
It is time that we come out of anachronistic
mindsetofsuspectinganddoubtingeveryactofthe
Police,lestthejusticedeliverysystemshouldbecome
amockery.

343] Inthepresentcase,itisthecaseoftheprosecution,the
accused No.6 Saibaba used pseudo/alias name as Prakash, while
making correspondence with the members of banned organization
(CPIMaoistandRDF).ThedefenceAdvocateShriGadlinghadgiven
suggestionin crossexaminationtoP.W.6AtulAvhadthat inMaoist
group every party members hasalias name and theynormallyuse
aliasname.Itiswellsettledthatwhenthesuggestionisadmittedin
crossexaminationbywitnessitconstitutesevidence.

344] Followingarethetextdocumentswhichwerefoundin16
GBmemorycardseizedfrompersonalsearchofaccusedNo.3Hem
MishraandArt.1to41CDs,DVDs,pendrives,memorycardseized
fromthehousesearchofaccusedNo.6Saibaba.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
231 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1] ThedocumentsatArt.A21ofExh.266retrievedfromthe
16 GB memorycard of Sandisk company seized from the personal
searchofaccusedno.3HemMishraitisclearthatitisaletterwritten
by Jaddu and Prakash addressed to dear Comrade Red Salute in
whichdemandoffundofRs.2lacswasmadeandherequestedfor
askingtheinternationalfraternalorganisationstowaitandsuspend
allworktilltheygetguidancefromComrades.Nowitisnecessaryto
seewhetherthatPrakashisaccusedno.6Saibaba.

345] It is important to note that from the house search of

accused no.6 Saibaba four harddisks were seized alongwith
electronic gadgets Arts.1 to 41 and data in one harddiskwas not
retrievedandfromtheCFSLreport(Exh.267)itisclearthatdatain
thatharddiskwasnotdetectedandfromthedocumentatpageno.17
ofExh.267foundintheharddiskseizedfromthehousesearchof
accusedno.6Saibaba,whereinitismentionedthatPrakashfailedto
finalise the programme and constitution of A4 by incorporating
amendmentsacceptedintheconferenceandwhenthedraftalmost
finalisedtheharddiskofPrakash'scomputergotcrashed.Onperusal
ofCFSLreport(Exh.267)itrevealsthatinCFSLreport(Exh.267)on
thelastpageitismentionedthattheharddiskinEx.1couldnotbe
detectedandthesaidharddiskisthesameasreferredatpageno.17
ofExh.267.Hence,itisclearthatsaidcrashedharddiskwassentto
CFSLBombayalongwithotherelectronicdevices(Art.1to41)andit
could not be detected in the Cyber Forensic Scientific Laboratory.
Hence,itrevealsthatthenamePrakashmentionedinSecretary's
reportatpageno.17ofExh.267isnothingbutaccusedno.6Saibaba.
100%
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
232 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

346] Furtherfromtheletteratpageno.206ofExh.267taken
outfromtheharddiskExh.4seizedfromthehousesearchofaccused
no.6 Saibaba written by Prakashaddressed to The Secretary Sub
CommitteeonMassOrganization(SUCOMO)CPI(Maoist)dated
2December2006,itisclearthatPrakashhadgivenresignationfrom
hisprimarymembershipofthepartyandtotheFractionCommittee
due to deeply pained by the treatment metered out from some
comradesandhishealthisalsonotcooperatingtofacetheaggressive
attitudesofthecomrades.Furtherfromthedocumentatpageno.17
ofExh.267 takenoutfromtheharddiscExh.4titledas Secretary's
reportregardingreviewofRDFworksinceitsformation,inwhich
itismentionedthatwholehouserejectedJosephandreiteratedthat
Prakashshouldbethechiefcoordinatorandwholehouseexpressed
confidenceinhimandfinallyPrakashagreedtothesaidresolution.

347] Further from the letter at page no.81 of Exh.267

addressedtoaccusedno.6G.N.SaibababyUfukBerdan,Chairperson
of the International Relation Commission ATIK (Avrupa Turkiyeli
Isciler Konfederasyonu) shows that this letter was written by ATIK
internationalorganizationtoaccusedno.6Saibabaaboutinvitation
and lastly complimented accused no.6 G.N. Saibaba to meet them
soonandwishhimallthebestinhisstruggle.Fromabove,itreveals
thatallthesedocumentswerewrittenby accusedno.6Saibababy
using his pseudo name Prakash and from Art.A21 found with
accusedno.3HemMishrain16GBmemorycarditisclearthatitwas
writtenbyaccusedno.6SaibababyusingpseudonamePrakashand
furtheritisclearthatthereisnomanipulationandfabricationbythe
police,intheelectronicdataseizedfromaccusedno.3HemMishra
andaccusedno.6Saibaba.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
233 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

348] Further,itisimportanttonotethatintheharddiskseized
from the house search of accused no.6 Saibaba there are several
personaldocumentsoftheaccusedno.6Saibabaregardinglettersby
accused no.6 Saibaba to his daughter, letter written by wife of
accused no.6 Saibaba by name of Vasantha and letter written by
accused no.6 Saibaba to the colleges regarding the problem of his
daughterandhadthepoliceintendedtomanipulateorfabricatethe
datatheywouldnothaveplantedthoseletters.

349] Further in the said harddisk Exh.2, 3 and 4 there are

severalfileswhichwereprotectedbyuniquepasswordandthisfactis
clearfromtheCFSLreport(Exh.267)thatsomefilesweredetected
withuniquepasswordandcouldnotbeopenedinCFSL,Mumbaiand
somefileswerepasswordprotectedandthosewereopenedwiththe
passwordsdetectedbyCFSLandatCFSLreportExh.267passwordin
one harddisk the password detected by CFSL are mentioned as
Manjeera123andMalabiragi.Theprosecutionhasfiledonrecorda
letterundersignatureofaccusedno.6Saibabastatingthereinthatthe
name of passwords are manjeera123 and malabiragi. The
signature bearing on the letter if compared with the signatures of
accused no.6 Saibaba on his application, vakalatnama, plea of
accusedandthestatementu/s313Cr.P.C.byvirtueofSection73of
EvidenceActthisCourtfoundnodifference.However,becauseofthe
fact that no question wasput toaccused no.6Saibabau/s313of
Cr.P.C.withrespecttothatletterthatcannotbeconsidered.Butfrom
thefactthatoneharddiskwasnotdetectedseizedfromthehouse
searchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.Thisclearlyshowsthatallelectronic
gadgets were recovered from the house search of accused no.6
Saibaba.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
234 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

350] As discussed above accused no.6 Saibaba was using

pseudonameasPrakashandtothateffectsuggestionwasmadeto
the informant P.W.6 Atul Avhad and he admitted in his cross
examination that in Maoist groups every party member has alias
nameandmembersofbannedorganisationnormallyusealiasname.
So from this it is clear that in my opinion Prakash is nothing but
accusedno.6Saibabaandthedocumentsfoundin16GBmemory
card found in possession of accused no.3Hem Mishra i.e.Art.A21
showsthatitwaswrittenbyJadduandPrakash.Thisshowsthateven
thedatacontainedin16GBmemorycardisalsonotmanipulatedor
tamperedbythepolice.Itisimportanttonotethattherearecertain
textfileswhichwereprotectedbypasswordandeventhatpasswords
couldnotbedetectedbyCFSL. Hadthepoliceofficerintendedto
manipulateorfabricatetheelectronicdataintheelectronicgadgets
theywouldnothaveplantedthepasswordprotectedfilestherein.

351] Furtherthereareseveralpersonalfamilyphotographsof
accusedno.6SaibabaandHindisongsinaudioandvideoformand
EnglishandHindimoviesaround100innumbersfoundinelectronic
gadgetsseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.Asper
judgmentofMadrasHighCourtinthecaseofK.Ramajayamalias
AppuvInspectorofPolicereportedin2016Cri.L.J.1542asthe
photographs, text, audio, videoclips have metadatafilesand it is
difficult to manipulate. DuringexaminationinchiefP.W.21Bhavesh
Nikamstatedthatheusedmetadatatechniquefordeterminingthe
same.Hestatedthatauthorofeveryfileisametadatapropertyfile
andit isinthenameofprofilesystem. Hadthepolicewantedto
manipulate data they would not have included the Hindi songs,
movies,personaldataandpersonalcommunication. Furtherduring
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
235 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

the course of argument in respect of text documents contained in

harddisk Exh.2,3 and 4 seized from house search of accused
Saiababa, the date of creation of file and author was seen and
followingarethetextdocumentsinwhichdateofcreationandauthor
areappearingasunder:

[i] AuthorofdraftmanifestoisG.N.Saibaba
and the same document is a part of
Exh.4/31.12.12/RDF Conference material titled as
draftmanifestoofRDFamendedbyconference.The
saiddocumentisopenedonthelaptopoftheCourt
and after putting cursor in specific file and right
clickingonthesaidfile,folder,propertiesisopened
andafteropeningthepropertyfolderindetailstab
the name of author is appearing as G.N.Saibaba
and the said document is created on 5.3.2012 at
12.29 p.m. and its word count are 8602 and it is
preparedinMicrosoftWord.

[ii] AnotherletterissuedbyPrakashtoDear
Comrade dated17thJune 2003at page no.205of
Exh.267 is opened on the laptop ofthe Court and
afterputtingcursoronspecificfileandrightclicking
on the said file, option 'properties' is opened and
afterclickingontheoption'properties'indetailstab
thenameofauthorisappearingasSaibabaandthe
saiddocumentiscreatedon20.6.2003at4.44p.m.
anditispreparedinMicrosoftWord.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
236 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

[iii] Aletteratpageno.206ofExh.267dated2nd
December 2006 having path Exh.4/Data/personal
writtenbyPrakashtoTheSecretary,Subcommittee
on Mass Organisations (SUCOMO) CPI (Maoist)
regardinghisresignationfromthepartyisopenedon
thelaptopoftheCourtandthenameofauthoris
appearingasaaaandthesaiddocumentiscreated
on 2.12.2006 at 10.58 p.m. and it is prepared in
MicrosoftWord.

[iv] The another document Art150 is dated 12th

December, 2006 having path Exh23/ ALLL/
Accommodation Issue/Letters/ Representation
before the Inquiry Committee written by
G.N.Saibaba addressed to Proft. Anandakrishnan,
TheChairman,InquiryCommittee,isopenedonthe
laptop of the Court and the name of author is
appearingasaaaandthesaiddocumentiscreated
on 11.12.2006 at 6.04 p.m. and it is prepared in
MicrosoftWord.Accordingtotheprosecutionauthor
ofaaaisnothingbutaccusedno.6Saibaba.

[v] A letter at Page no.87 of Exh.267 dated 20

December2010havingpathEx4/cy475Ex4/c/All
old and new/News addressed to Dear concerned
comradesbyPrakashandtheentireteamisopened
onthelaptopoftheCourtandthenameofauthoris
appearing as Vasantha and the said document is
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
237 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

createdon20.12.2010at8.35p.m.andwordcount
is529anditispreparedinMicrosoftOfficeWord.

[vi] A document from the harddisk Exh.4 seized

from the house of accused no.6 Saibaba under
seizure panchanama (Exh.165) having path
Exh.4/latest/hai dear, written to Hai dear by
Amani, writtenbyAmanitoaccusedno.6Saibabai
isopenedonthelaptopoftheCourtandthenameof
author is appearing as Saibaba and the said
documentiscreatedon26.10.2002at9.11p.m.and
it is prepared in Microsoft Word. According to
prosecution Amaninothingbut awife ofaccused
no.6SaibababynameVasantha.

[vii] Adocumenttakenoutfromtheharddisk
Exh.4 at page no.200 of Exh.267 having path
Exh.4/newfolder/teachersresponse, addressedto
The Home Minister, Ministry of Home Affairs
Government of India New Delhi 110001 dated 4
August2013, isopenedonthelaptopoftheCourt
andthenameofauthorisappearingasVSandthe
saiddocumentiscreatedon4.8.2013at11.25p.m.
andwordcountis615anditispreparedinMicrosoft
Office Word. From the contents of this letter it
reveals that it was not written by Saibaba and
writtenbysomebodyelsebutinfactitiswrittenby
accusedno.6SaibabaastheauthorisVS.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
238 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

[viii] A document at Art.151 of pen drive

Exh.23 dated 21 August 2013 having path
letter/document Exh 23/ALLL/Letter re Adhoc
Appointment,writtenbyDr.G.N.Saibabaaddressed
toTheprincipalRamLalAnandCollegeUniversityof
DelhiBenitoJuarrejRoadNewDelhi110021andthe
author of said personal letter of accused no.6
SaibabaisVS.

352] Theprosecutionhasfiledtextdocumentscontaining247
pages retrieved from the harddisks seized from house search of
accused No.6 Saibaba and the said 247 pages are filed alongwith
CFSL report 267 at page No.1, there is a secretary report of RDF
conference,whichistitledasunder

REVOLUTIONARYDEMOCRATICFRONT(RDF)
Secretary'sReport(presentedinthe1stConferenceofRDF)
FirstConferenceoftheRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF
2223April,SundaraiyaVigyamBhavan,Hyderabad,Telangana)

353] Itisimportanttonotethatthereisalsovideoclipsofthe
1st conferenceheldon2223AprilatHyderabad.Thesaidvideo
clip, found in harddisk was played on the laptap the court in
presenceofaccusedandhisAdvocateGadlingandSpecialPP.anditis
seen that the address as givenin Exh.1isappearingin videoclip.
Thisshowsthatthevideoclipof1 st conferencefoundinharddiscs
seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedSaibabaisnotmanipulated.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
239 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

354] FurtherthereisareferenceatpointNo.40,ofpageno.1of
Exh.267thatpublicprotestmeetingagainstfakeEncounterKillingof
MaoistLeaderKishenjiwasheldinGandhiPeaceFoundation,Delhi
on13December,2011.TheCDofMoserbear,onwhichitiswritten
asOnTrinamoolissueconventiononKishanjiNewDelhi13.12.11,
this CD was seized from house of accused no.6 Saibaba and on
playingthesaidCDonthelaptopoftheCourt,inthepresenceof
accused,hisAdvocateShriGadlingandSpl.P.P.ShriSathianathanand
accusedSaibabaisseenattendingthesaidfunctionthathesaidthat
hegotinspirationfromKishanji.ThisshowsthatthesaidCDisnot
manipulated.

355] There is a reference of comrade Jiten Murandi in page

No.1 of Exh. 267 that Jiten Murandi was falsely implicated under
DraconianLawsandhewasimprisonmentofvariousGovernmentand
butinspiteoftheirincarceration,theyarerelentlesslyfightinginside
theprisonsagainsttheantipeoplepoliciesofthecentralandState
Governmentandforprisonersrights.Wesalutethesebravecomrade
of ours. Two CDs cassettes of Moserbear company on which
conventionofJiten(partI)andPartIIiswrittenArt.52and53were
seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedNo.6SaibabaandinoneCD,
whichwasplayedonthelaptopoftheCourtinpresenceofaccused,
hisAdvocateGadlingandSpecialPPShriSathainathanandaccused
No.4PrashantRahiisseenattendingthesaidmeetingondaiswith
other persons and one ladywasalsoseenaddressingthe meeting.
ThisshowsthatdatacontainedinthevideoclipsinArt.52and53is
notmanipulated.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
240 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

356] Furtherthere is a reference at page no.1ofExh.267at

Sr.No.48 that RDF launches election boycott programme. Further
there is a videoclip found in the hard disc seized from the house
searchofaccusedno.6Saibabaandthesaidvideoclipishavingpath
Exh.3/films/s1/RDF/4/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2, and the said video
clipwasplayedonthelaptopofthecourtinpresenceofaccused,his
AdvocateShriGadlingandSpecialPPShriSathainathananditisseen
that accused no.6 Saibaba said that RDF rejects the parliamentary
path and strives for intensifying people's struggles to overhaul the
current semifeudalcolonial societyandtobuildanewdemocratic
society and he further said that RDF reject electoral system. This
showsthatthevideoclipisnotmanipulated.

357] In view of clear evidence of Scientific Expert P.W.21

BhaveshNikamthathedidnotanychangeincreateddate. Hence,
from the above facts it is clear that the dates which were created
earliertoseizureofsaidpropertyi.e.16GBmemorycardfromthe
possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra and Arts.1to 41 from the
house search of accused no.6 Saibaba. From all above facts
prosecutionhasprovedbeyondreasonabledoubtthatatnopointof
timetherewasanyalternationormanipulationintheelectronicdata
containedinelectronicgadgets.Hence,theelectronicdatacontained
inoriginalelectronicgadgetsintheformofaudio,videoandtextcan
be considered without the certificate as required u/s 65B of the
IndianEvidenceAct.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
241 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Delayinfilingcertificateu/s.65BofEvidenceAct

358] AccordingtodefencecertificateunderSection65Bofthe
EvidenceActwasfiledafteroneandhalfyear. Thepolicereceived
theCFSLreports(Exhs.266and267)on15.2.2014butthecertificate
under Section 65B of the Evidence Act was received from CFSL,
Mumbaion22.3.2016. Hencethereisdelayofmorethanoneand
halfyear. Hence,itcannotbereadinevidence. However,Division
BenchofDelhiHighCourtinthecaseofKundanSinghvs.TheState
reportedinMANU/DE/3674/2015heldthat

Evenifthecertificationisnotobtainedatthetime
of collection of evidence, yet, at the time of trial,
evidence aliunde can be given through the person
whowasinchargeofthesurverintermsofSection
65BoftheAct.

359] In the present case, the said certificate was produced

beforethecommencementofevidenceanditwasprovedthroughthe
evidenceofScientificExpertP.W.21BhaveshNikam.Hence,inviewof
abovejudgmentitcanbereadinevidenceandcontentionofdefence
isliabletoberejected.

360] Inviewofaboveimpeachablecircumstancesbroughton
recordprosecutionhasclearlyprovedthatfromthehousesearchof
accusedno.6SaibabapoliceseizedelectronicgadgetslikeCDs,DVDs,
pendrives,harddisksi.e.Articlesno.1to41alongwithotherarticles
fromthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaandtherewasnotampering
oralterationintheelectronicdatacontainedtherein.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
242 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Authenticityofelectronicevidence

361] According to defence voicerecorder, videorecorder and

taperecorderfromwhichtheCDs,DVDscopiedwerenotproduced
onrecord. Hence,hesubmittedthatthedatacontainedin16GB
memorycardandArts.1to41CDs,DVDs,harddisks,pendriveswere
tamperedandplantedbytheInvestigatingOfficer.Insupportofhis
submission he placed reliance on the judgment of Sanjaysinh
RamraoChavanvs.DattatrayGulabraoPhalkereportedin(2015)
3SupremeCourtCases123,whereinitisheldthat

B. Evidence Act, 1872 Ss.65A and 65B

Authenticity of electronic evidence Analysis
/verificationofsourceSignificanceofInaudible
voice recording Voice recorder not subjected to
analysis Alleged translated version, held, cannot
be relied on Held, without source, there is no
authenticity for translation Source and
authenticityarethetwokeyfactorsforanelectronic
evidence Criminal Trial Proof Electronic
evidence.

362] TheelectronicgadgetsArt.1to141,seizedfromthehouse
searchofaccusedSaibabacontainingelectronicdataintext,audio,
video and photograph form and 16 GB memory card containing
electronic data in text form seized from the possession of accused
No.3 Hem Mishra is proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable
doubtanditisintheexclusiveknowledgeoftheaccusedNo.3and6,
whetherthedatacontainedinaboveelectronicgadgetsinprimaryor
secondary form, but they have not explained the same in their
statementsundersection313ofCr.P.C. Theyonlydeniedthatthe
saiddatawasmanipulated.Hencethenonproductionofcamerafrom
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
243 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

which videography was done and the nonexamination of

videographer,willnotbefataltothecaseoftheprosecution.

Ownershipofhouse

363] Itwasarguedbythedefencesidethattheprosecutionhas
notproducedanycogentevidenceonrecordtoshowthatthehouse
in which search was made was owned by accused No.6 Saibaba,
hence,theevidenceinrespectofseizureofelectronicgadgetsarticle
No.1to41willnotbehelpfultotheprosecution.

364] ItisnotindisputethattheaccusedNo.6wasworkingasa
professorinDelhiUniversityatthetimeofincident.TheP.W.2Jagat
Bhole,thepanchwitnessinhisexaminationstatedthatheishaving
barbershopwithinthepremisesofDelhiUniversityandheknowsthe
houseofSaibabawhichwassituatedbehindhisshopandaftertaking
the searchofthehouseofSaibaba,thecopyofpanchanamawas
given to accused Saibaba. This shows that the house from where
electronic gadgets Art.1 to 41 were seized was owned by accused
Saibabaandnonproductionofdocumentaryevidenceisnotfatal.

Effects of nonblocking of the objectionable websites under

Section69AoftheInformationTechnologyAct,2000

365] He submitted that Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas

Bawcheinhiscrossexaminationadmittedthatheknowsthatthereis
one website as Naxal related banned thoughts and all information
regarding CPI Maoist and Naxal literature, meetings, central
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
244 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

committeeresolutionsareavailable. Hefurthersubmittedthatthis
admissionexplainsthatthedocumentswhichwasallegedlyfoundin
theelectronicequipmentsandseizedfromthehouseofSaibabaare
alreadyinpublicdomainandiftheGovernmentwouldhavefound
those to be incriminating material then they by exercising their
powerwouldhavebannedthepublicationorblockedthosewebsites
for public access. This power lies within the Government which is
mentionedinSection69AoftheInformationTechnologyAct,2000.It
deals with power to issue directions for blocking the website to
prevent public from accessing any information through computer
resource.Hesubmittedthattilldatethereisnosuchbanimposedby
theGovernmentonthesewebsitesandtheyarealreadyinthepublic
domain.Itmayhavebeentheconsciousdecisionofthegovernment
not to restrict the fundamental right of 'freedom of expression'
guaranteedbytheConstitutionofIndiaunderArticle19(1)(a).So
howcouldthepolicecanclaimthosedocumentstobeincriminating
materialswhichareinpublicdomain?

366] Inthepresentcasethedatacontainedintextformwas
found in 16 GB memorycard of Sandisk company seized from
accusedno.3HemMishraandArts.1to41CDs,DVDs,pendrives,
harddiskseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaare
letters, correspondence by Comrades to members of CPI (Maoist),
draft manifesto of RDF organisation, personal communication i.e.
emailandthedefencehasnotabletoshowthattheelectronicdatain
textformisthesamewhichisavailableonthewebsiteonInternet.It
is important to note that nowadays several objectionable and
offensive materials are available on Internet e.g. pornographic
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
245 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

websites and porn videosetc. Though the saidwebsite isnot yet

bannedbytheGovernmentbyexercisingpoweru/s69ofInformation
TechnologyActthatcannotbegroundforapersontodownloadthe
saiddataandtouseitforcommittingthecrime.Hence,merenon
banning of said website does not mean that the data contained
thereinisnotoffensive.Hence,contentionofthedefenceisliableto
bediscardedonthiscountalone.
DepositingofMirrorimagesinrespectofdatacontainedin16GB
memorycard seized from the possession of accused no.3 Hem
MishraandElectronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)likeCDs,DVDs,pen
drives,harddisksseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
SaibabainAheriPoliceStation

367] According to the prosecution the CFSL, Mumbai has

examined the 16 GB memory card seized from personal search of
HemMishraandP.W.5broughtthemirrorimagesinrespectofdata
containinginmemorycard.

EVIDENCE

368] HeadConstableRavindraManoharKumbhare(P.W.5)who
wasattachedtoAheriPoliceStationandcarriedmuddemalproperty
toCFSL,Mumbaiandbroughtmirrorimagesof16GBmemorycard
ofSandiskCompanyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3Hem
Mishraandfurtherbroughtmirrorimagesoftheelectronicgadgets
articles1to41i.e.CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisksseizedfromthe
house search of accused no.6 Saibaba from CFSL, Mumbai and
deposited the same in Aheri Police Station. Ravindra in his
examination at Exh.210 stated that on 3082013 he received the
mirrorimagecopiesinanotherbyCFSL,Bombayasperthedemand
and deposited the same in Police Station Aheri with Investigating
OfficerP.W.11SDPOSuhasBawcheon3182013insealedcondition.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
246 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

369] Accordingtoprosecutionafterdepositingofmirrorimages
with Investigating officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche by carrier P.W.5
RavindraKumbhare,InvestigatingofficerP.W.11SuhasBawchedrew
panchanama with the help of panch witnesses P.W.4 Shrikant
GaddewarandDildarKhanatExh.201.

370] Investigating officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in his

examinationstatedthathe receivedmirrorimagesofmemorycards
seizedfrompossession ofaccusedno.3HemMishra andthesaid
mirror images were seized in the presence of panchas and
panchanamawasdrawn underthesignaturesofpanchasvideExh.
201andduringpanchanamatheyopenedthememorycardonthe
computer with its card writer and upon opening the same they
foundsomevideofilesandwordfileandvideofilesandwordfiles
werenotprotectedbypasswordbutinthesaidmemorycardthere
wasonefoldercontaining10fileswhichwereprotectedbypassword
andthereaftertheytookoutprintoutofwordfilesandtheyareArt.
A/17toA/21andtheyarethesameprintoutwhichweretakenfrom
thememorycardseizedfromaccusedHemMishrawhichwasopened
inthecomputerwiththehelpofcardwriterinP.S.Aheri.

371] Incrossexaminationhestatedthathecametoknowthat
some files were protected by password after receiving the mirror
imagesfromCFSLandthisfactwasalsotoldbyaccusedHemMishra
thatsomefileswereprotectedbypasswordduringhisinterrogation.
Furtherhedeniedthatthememorycardwasplantedbyhimandhe
wasknowingthatitwasprotectedbypassword.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
247 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

372] The panch witness P.W.4 Shrikant Gaddewar in his

examinationstatedthathewascalledon3182013atP.S.Aheriat8
p.m.to9p.m.andatthattime,DySPBawcheandanotherpanchand
policepersonnels,PIBadgujarwerepresentthereandDy.SPtoldme
thatonememorycardwasfoundwithaccusedHemMishrawhich
wassenttoforensiclaboratoryMumbaiandmirrorcopyofthesame
hasbeenreceivedandpanchanamatothateffectwastobemadeand
onepoliceofficialbroughtonepaper boxandthatpaperboxwas
havingcellotapepastedonitandthenpoliceopenedthatboxinhis
presenceandinsidethatboxtherewaswhitepaperandinthatwhite
paper there was plastic pouchandinside that pouch there wasa
blackmemorycardandonthatmemorycarditwaswrittenSandisk
16GBmicroSDandthecardwasputinthecardwriterandthesaid
cardwriterinsertedinthecomputerandmemorycardwasopened
withthehelpofcardwriterandhehimselfinsertedthecardwriterin
thecomputerandafteropeningtheyfoundonefolderonwhichCy
and some number was written and that was opened and in that
folder, there were 10 to 12 PDF files and they were protected by
secrete passwords and in the same memory card there were some
wordfilesandhedoesnotexactlyrememberhowmanywordfiles
werethereandtherewereanotherfoldersinthesamememorycard
andhedoesnotrememberthenamewhichweregiventothePDF
filesandwordfiles.

373] Thepoliceopened thewordfilesinhispresenceandin

onefiletherewasletterwritteninHindilanguageandthesenderwas
bynameJavianditwasaddressedtoSathiandinthatletteritwas
writtenthattheconditionofUttaraKhandwasnotproper.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
248 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

374] Thereafteranotherwordfilewasopenedbypoliceandin
thatfileletterwassentbyCPIMaoistanditwasaddressedtoNRB
andinthatfileitwaswrittenaboutpoliceawarenessisfakeandlot
ofmatter was written but he doesnot rememberitandthereafter
policeopenedanotherfile,theletterwassignedbySahyadriandon
topofletteritwaswrittenasCPIMaoistandthesignaturewasin
Marathi and matter was in English and thereafter police opened
anotherfileandinthatletterdemandofmoneywasmaderegarding
acknowledgementreceiptofRs.1,50,000/,Rs.75,000/anditwas
alsowrittenloanofRs.2,50,000/wastakenandrequirementsofRs.
13lacsandinanotherfileitwaswrittenthatMaheshwasrecently
releasedfromthejailandhewaswronglyexpelledfromtheparty
buthewasdoinggoodworkandthentheprintoutofthesaidfiles
around 16 to 17 pages were taken and on the said print out his
signaturesweretakenandtheelectronicdatainthe memorycard
wascopiedbyhimonthecomputeroftheP.S.Aheriandthesaid
printoutwastakenbyhimandtheprintoutbearshissignaturesand
thememorycardwasthereaftersealedandlabelsandsignaturesof
panchaswereputonthemandpanchanamatothateffectwasdrawn
on3182013anditbearshissignatureandsignaturesofpanchasand
itscontentsarecorrectanditisatExh.201andthePrintoutnow
showntohim,bearshissignaturesandthosearetakenoutbyhim
andthosearemarkedatArt.A/17toA/21.

DepositingofmirrorimagescontainingElectronicgadgets(Arts.1
to 41) like CDs, DVDs, pendrives, harddisks seized from the
housesearchofaccusedno.6SaibabainAheriPoliceStation

375] P.W.5RavindraKumbhareinhisexaminationstatedthat
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
249 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

on20.09.2013hereceivedmirrorimagesregardingto1harddisc
whichhehaddepositedalongwithletterdt.14.09.2013i.e.Exh.212
and he deposited the said mirror images with Aheri P.S. on
21.09.2013 and the muddemal which he deposited on 17.09.2013
consists24sealedpacketsandonesealedparcel.

376] HeagainhadgonetoCFSL,Bombayon1.10.2013astheir
P.S.hadreceivedphonethatmirrorimagesofthearticlesdeposited
with them were ready and hence, he went to the office of CFSL,
Bombaytobringthesameandaccordinglyhewenttotheofficeof
CFSL,Bombayon5.10.2013andreceivedmirrorimagesunderthe
letterfromCFSL,Bombayinsealedconditionanddepositedthesame
inAheriP.S.andhisstatementwasrecordedbypoliceinthiscrime.

377] AfterreceiptsofmirrorimagesthepanchanamaExh.204
wasmadebyP.W.11SuhasBawcheinthepresenceofP.W.4Shrikant
Gaddewar.

378] Investigating officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in his

examination stated that on 22.09.2013 he recorded statement of
P.C.Kumbhare regarding depositing of harddisks containing mirror
image from the harddisks submitted to CFSL, Bombay and on
23.09.2013 he prepared panchanama regarding contents of the
electronicmaterialintheharddiskscontainingmirrorimageinthe
presence of panchas and now he had shown the panchanama
dtd.23.09.2013anditbearshissignatureandsignatureofpanchas
anditscontentsarecorrectanditisatExh.204.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
250 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

379] The panch witness P.W.4 Shrikant Gaddewar in his

examinationstatedthatthereafterpoliceagaincalledhimon239
2013inAheriP.S.Dy.S.PBawche,policeofficialsandanotherpanch
witnesswerepresentthereandpolicetoldhimthatthemirrorcopyof
the hard disc seized from the house of Saibaba has been received
from Forensic laboratory and panchanamatothat effect wastobe
madeandthenpolicetookoutonewhitepaperpouchandasthe
panchanamatookplacebefore2andhalfyear,hedoesnotrecollect
thecolourofpouchanditwassealedpacketanditwasopenedinmy
presenceandInthesaidpackettherewasharddiskandafteropening
thesame,policeaskedhimtoconnectittothecomputeratP.S.and
thenheputthesaidharddisconthecomputeranditwasplayedand
itwasopenedinthecomputerandtherewere7folders,somefiles
and on the said folder Ex numbering were there and he does not
rememberwhetherthefileswerenumberedandthereafterasperthe
instructionofDy.S.P.importantfileswerecheckedandthereafterthe
saidharddiskwassealedinmypresenceandinpresenceofother
panchasandsignaturesandlabelswereputonitandpanchanamato
thateffectwaspreparedinhispresenceandpanchanamanowshown
tohim,isthesameanditisatExh.204anditscontentsarecorrect.

380] Investigating officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in his

examinationstated that on6.10.2015P.C.Kumbhare hadbrought2
harddisks containing mirror images and he recorded statement of
P.C.Kumbhare and panchanama to that effect was prepared on
7.10.2013anditbearshissignatureanditscontentsarecorrectandit
isatExh.205.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
251 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

381] The panch witness P.W.4 Shrikant Gaddewar in his

examinationstatedthatthereafterpoliceagaincalledtoP.S.Aherion
7102013. Dy. S.P. Bawche, police officials and another panch
witnesseswerepresentthereandpolicetoldhimthatthemirrorcopy
of the two hard discs seized from the house of Saibaba has been
receivedfromForensiclaboratoryandpanchanamatothateffectwas
tobemadeandthenpolicetookoutonewhitepaperpouchandas
the panchanama took place before 2 and half year, he does not
recollect the colour of pouch and it was sealed packet and it was
openedinmypresenceandinthesaidpackettherewere2harddisks
and after opening the same,policeaskedhimtoconnect it tothe
computeratP.S.andthenheputthethoseharddiscsonthecomputer
andthosewereplayedanditwasopenedinthecomputerandinone
harddisk, therewere16to17foldersand 25filesandinanother
harddisktherewere25foldersandsomefilesandinonefile'video
conference' was written and in another file it was written 'Cobad
Gandhi'andonthesaidfolderExnumberingwerethereandhedoes
notrememberwhetherthefileswerenumberedandthereafterasper
theinstructionofDy.S.P.importantfileswerecheckedandthereafter
thesaidharddisksweresealedinmypresenceandinpresenceof
other panchas and signatures and labels were put on it and
panchanama to that effect was prepared in his presence and
panchanamanowshowntohim,isthesameanditisatExh.205and
itscontentsarecorrect.

SendingofHardcopiesofmirrorimagesof16GBmemorycard
ofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3
HemMishraandElectronicgadgetsArts.1to41seizedfromthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
252 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

house search of accused no.6 Saibaba to CFSL, Mumbai for

certification.

382] The mirrorimages of 16 GB memorycard of Sandisk

companyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishraand
Electronic gadgets Arts.1 to 41 seized from the house search of
accusedno.6SaibabawereretrievedbytheScientificOfficerBhavesh
Nikam(P.W.21)atCFSL,MumbaiandsameweresenttoInvestigating
Officer Suhas Bawche (P.W.11) vide letter dated 5.10.2013.
Thereafter,InvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche(P.W.11)inpresenceof
Shrikant Gaddewar(P.W.4)tookprintouts(hardcopies)ofthesaid
mirrorimagesonthelaptopinAheriPoliceStationandthesaidhard
copiesweresentbyInvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche(P.W.11)vide
letterdated30.1.2014videExh.263forcertification.

383] Thereafter Scientific Officer Bhavesh Nikam (P.W.21),

CFSL,MumbaicertifiedthehardcopiesofincriminatingdataArt.A17
toA21containedintextformin16GBmemorycardseizedfromthe
possessionofaccusedno.3HemMishraunderpanchanama(Exh.137)
alongwithitsgeneratedanalysisreportatExh.266andtheattested
hardcopiesoftheincriminatingdatacontainedinelectronicgadgets
i.e.CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks,memorycardseizedfromthe
houseofaccusedno.6Saibabaunderseizurepanchanama(Exh.165)
intextformandphotographsalongwithgeneratedanalysisreportat
Exh.267containing247pagesandwerehandedovertoLPCApeksha
Ramteke(P.W.7)andshedepositedthesameinSDPO,Office,Aheri.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
253 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

EVIDENCE

384] InthisrespectScientificOfficerBhaveshNikam(P.w.21)in
his examination statedthat he issuedletter to P.W.11 SDPOAheri,
alongwithmirrorimageofharddiskExh.4,Exh.6to12,Exh.14to
17, Exh.18, Exh.19, Exh.20/3, Exh.20/4,Exh.20/5at Exh.373and
also issued letter dated 5102013 in respect of copy of Exh.5,
Exh.21, Exh.22, Exh.23, Exh.24 to SDPO Aheri at Exh.374 and
thereafter, hardcopiesofAnnexurestoExh.267were providedto
himbyletterfromSDPOAherion3012014andthereafterbasedon
contents present keywords were generated and based on file path
provided by Investigating Officer P.W.11 SDPO Aheri and the
concerned documents were searched and verified and provided in
hardcopiesandafterattestationprovidedtotheinvestigatingofficer
in Annexure harddisk marked as Annexure harddisk Cy47513
alongwith report generated by him dated 1522014 vide O.W.no.
4860/2014.Hestatedthaton1522014onesealedparcelcontaining
onememorycardof16GB,onereport,oneAnnexureharddiskand
attestedhardcopies(15pages)werehandedovertoP.W.7Apeksha
Ramteke,LPCandthosewerereceivedbyherasperreceiptandseal
ofofficeofCFSLKalina. Heidentifiedreportdated1522014and
hardcopiesof15pagesatExh.266.Onthesamedayhehandedover
onesealedplasticboxcontaining24separatesealedparcelsandone
sealed parcel containing laptop, one sealed report, one Annexure
harddisk, attested hard copies (247 pages) to P.W.7 Apeksha
Ramteke, LPC Buckle no.4131. The report dated 1522014
containing247pagesannexedtoExh.267.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
254 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

385] Inhiscrossexaminationhedeniedthatheblindlysigned
on the analysis reports (Exhs.266 and 267) on the instructions of
P.W.11SuhasBawcheandsigned247pagesand15pages.

386] The learned Spl. P.P. Shri Sathainathan submitted that

afterreceivingthemirrorimagesof16GBmemorycardofSandisk
company seized from the possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra,
Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche (P.W.11) took out printouts of
incriminatingdocumentsatArts.A17toA21(15Pages)withthehelp
of panch witness Shrikant Gaddewar (P.W.4) under panchanama
(Exh.201).Hefurthersubmittedafterreceivingthemirrorimagesof
electronic gadgets Arts.1 to 41 CDs, DVDs, pendrives, harddisks
seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba,investigating
officer Suhas Bawche (P.W.11) opened those mirrorimages in
presenceofpanchwitnessShrikantGaddewar(P.W.4)andprintoutsof
incriminatingdocumentsandphotographsi.e.247pagesweretaken.

387] He further submitted that Investigating Officer Suhas

Bawche(P.W.11)byhisletterdated30.1.2014sentthosehardcopies
toCFSL,Mumbaiforcertificationandafterduecertificationofallthe
hardcopies, Scientific Officer BhaveshNikam (P.W.21) handedover
the same to LPC Apeksha Ramteke (P.W.7) along with its analysis
reports(Exh.266and267)andshedepositedthesamewithSDPO
Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche (P.W.11). He submitted that
evidence of Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche (P.W.11), panch
witnessShrikantGaddewar(P.W.4)andLPCApekshaRamteke(P.W.7)
is consistent with each other and the same was corroborated by
panchanamas (Exh.201 and Exh.202) and letter dated 30.1.2014
(Exh.263). He submitted that nothing was elicited from the cross
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
255 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

examinationofthesewitnessestodisbelievetheirtestimony.Hence,
hesubmittedthatprosecutionhasprovedthathardcopiesof16GB
memorycardandelectronicgadgetsArts.1to41weresenttoCFSL
Mumbai,thosewerecertifiedbyScientificOfficerandthesaidhard
copiesweredepositedinAheriPoliceStation.

Conclusion

388] Onperusalofevidenceavailableonrecorditisclearthat
the Investigating OfficerSuhasBawche(P.W.11)afterreceivingthe
mirrorimagesfromCFSL,MumbaiopenedthesameinAheriPolice
StationinpresenceofpanchwitnessShrikantGaddewar(P.W.4)and
tookouttheprintouts(hardcopies)ofincriminatingdocumentsand
photographsandthoseweresenttoCFSL,Mumbaivideletterdated
30.1.2014 (Exh.263) forcertification andScientificExpert Bhavesh
Nikam(P.W.21)afterverifyingthesamefromitsmirrorimagesduly
certified the same and thereafter handedover to LPC Apeksha
Ramteke(P.W.7)alongwithgeneratedanalysisreports(Exh.266and
267)andthesameweredepositedbyherinAheriPoliceStation.

Depositingoforiginal16GBmemorycardandoriginalelectronic
gadgetsArt.1to41toAheriPoliceStationfromCFSL,Bombay

389] Accordingtotheprosecutionafterexaminationof16GB
memorycardandArt.1to41electronicgadgetsseizedfromaccused
No.3 Hem Mishra and accused No.6 Saibaba and the same were
broughtbyApekshaRamtekefromCFSL,Bombayanddepositedthe
sametoAheriPoliceStation. Tothateffectprosecutionexamined
ApekshaRamteke.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
256 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

390] P.W.7ApekshaRamtakeinherexaminationstatedthatin
themonthofFebruary2013shewasattachedtoPoliceheadquarter
GadchiroliandshewasongeneraldutyandsheusedtocarryTapal,
on 1322014 she had taken post (Tapal ) from Gadchiroli
headquarter and handed over to Director General of Police office,
Mumbai and on 1422014 shereceivedtelephonecallfromSDPO
office, Aheri that she had to bring some Tapal from Forensic
Laboratory Mumbai (CFSL) relating to Crime No. 3017/2013 and
therefore, shewenttotheofficeofCFSLintheeveningbutitwas
closedandhence,shewenton1522014toCFSLofficeBombayand
shereceivedmuddemalin3sealedpacketsinCrimeNo.3017/2013
and she took those 3 sealed packets and then she signed the
acknowledgementreceiptinthatofficeandthereaftershetookthose
3sealedpacketandhandedover itinSDPOoffice,Aheriandthe
entryofdepositedsealedpacketsinMuddemalregisteratAheriPolice
StationisExh.278D.

391] In her cross examination she denied that on 1422014

shedidnotreceiveanymessagefromSDPOoffice,Aheriandshedid
notgointheofficeofCFSL,Bombayandshedidnottakeanyarticles
fromCFSLoffice,BombayandshedidnotdepositittoSDPOoffice,
Aheriandherstatementwasrecordedbypoliceandshedidnotstate
inherstatementthatshereceived3sealedpacketfromCFSLoffice
MumbaianddepositedthosepacketsinSDPOofficeAheri,andshe
deniedthatshedeposedfalselyattheinstanceofSDPODhumal.

Depositingof16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyandother
articlesseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishra
andelectronicgadgetsArticles1to41andotherarticlesseized
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
257 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

fromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba inCourtatthe
timeoffilingofchargesheetagainsttheaccused.

392] Atthetimeoffilingofchargesheet,abovearticlesi.e.16
GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyandArts.1to41CDs,DVDs,
pendrives, harddisks alongwith other muddemal articles were
depositedbyMuddemalClerkofAheriPoliceStationGaneshRathod
(P.W.4)intheSessionsCourtwithSuperintendent(MuddemalClerk)
Khumaji Korde (P.W.17). In this respect prosecution relied on the
evidenceofGaneshRathod(P.W.4)andKhumajiKorde(P.W.17).
EVIDENCE
393] Ganesh Rathod (P.W.4) Muddemal Clerk of Aheri Police
StationinhisexaminationatExh.258statedthathedepositedthe
muddemalpropertyon13102015inSessionsCourt,Gadchiroliand
prepared invoice challan (Exh.135) through Police Constable Firoz
Pathan for depositing all property in crime in court and when the
propertywasdepositedincourtitwasinsealedconditionandthe
propertyclerkoftheDistrictcourtaskedhim,hewantedtoopenthe
sealedenveloptoverifywhetherthepropertydepositedincourtisthe
sameasdescribedininvoicechallaninExh.135andhence,thesaid
propertywasopenedbythiswitnessinthecourtandthesamewas
verifiedbythepropertyclerkofDistrictClerkandgavereceiptabout
depositingofpropertyoncarboncopyofinvoicechallan(Exh.302).

394] He stated that on 1052013 P.W.11 SDPO Bawche

depositedonepropertyinthiscrimeandhegavepropertyno.6/2014
to the said property and took entry in the property register vide
Exh.276E. HebroughttheoriginalregisterbeforetheCourtandit
was verified from original register and found to be correct. This
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
258 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

propertywasdepositedbyNPCFirozPathaninthecourton522016
alongwithinvoicechallanExh.186.Nothingwasbroughtonrecordin
his crossexamination to disbelieve his evidence on the point of
depositingthemuddemalpropertyinthiscrimeinSessionsCourt.

395] Shri Khumaji Devaji Korde (P.W.18) was Court

Superintendent. He statedin hisexaminationat Exh.339thatthe
muddemalincrimeno.3017/2013wasplacedbeforehimbyHead
ConstableRathod(P.W.13)andalongwiththesaidmuddemalinvoice
challanwasalsosentandallthepropertiesproducedbeforehimwas
in sealed condition and some property was having seal of CFSL
BombayandsomepropertywashavingsealofPoliceStation,Aheri.
Hestatedthathedidnotbreakopenthesealofpropertyreceived
fromCFSLandaskedthepolicetoopenthesealinrespectofproperty
produced from Police Station, Aheri for verification purpose. He
verifiedthepropertyfromseizurepanchanamaandinvoicechallan
Exh.302andgavetheendorsementaboutreceiptofproperty.Hehad
broughtoriginalpropertyregisterintheCourtinwhichitiswritten
thatthesealedenvelopsofpropertyno.1to14wereopened,copyof
whichisatExh.340.

396] Nothinghasbeenelicitedfromthecrossexaminationof
prosecution witnesses to discredit the prosecution evidence on the
point of depositing the mirror images of electronic gadgets seized
from possession of accused No.3HemMishraandhousesearchof
accusedNo.6Saibabaandsendingofhardcopiesforcertificationto
CFSLanddepositingofmuddemalfromCFSLofficetoAheriPolice
StationandintheCourt,henceprosecutionevidenceinthatrespect
canbetakenintoconsideration.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
259 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ElectronicEvidenceinrespectofaccusedno.3HemMishra,No.4
PrashantRahiandNo.6Saibaba.

397] Nowitisnecessarytoseetheevidentiaryvalueofdata
containedintextformin16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompany
seized from accused no.3 Hem Mishra under seizure panchnama
(Exh.137) and the data contained in text, audio, video form in
electronicgadgetsArticlesno.1to41i.e.CDs,DVDs,pendrives,hard
disksseizedfromthehousesearchofhouseofaccusedno.6Saibaba
under seizure panchanama (Exh.165). In some CDs, DVDs, pen
drivesandharddisktherearephotographsandvideoclipsofAccused
No.3 Hem Mishra, No.4 Prashant Rahi and No.6 Saibaba while
attending and addressing the meetings of banned organization
CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDF.
The above electronic gadgets were produced by police alongwith
ChargeSheetandtheseformmuddemalpropertyatExh.135having
Articlenos.1to38.

398] Atthecommencementofthetrialonbehalfofthe
accusednos.1to6on4.1.2016applicationatExh.145wasfiledon
record for getting soft copies of the data contained in electronic
gadgetsArticles1to41i.e.CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks,laptop,
memorycardwhichwereallegedtobeseizedfromthehousesearch
ofhouseofaccusedno.6Saibabaand16GBmemorycardofSandisk
companyseizedfromaccusedno.3HemMishra.Inordertopreserve
the hash value in respect of electronic data contained in the said
electronicgadgetsandtoavoidthepossibilityofediting,tampering
andalterationbypassinganorderon4.1.2016belowExh.145,the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
260 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

electronicgadgetsArticles1to41i.e.CDs,DVDs,pendrives,hard
disks,laptop,memorycardseizedfromthehousesearchofaccused
no.6Saibabaand16G.B.memorycardofSandiskcompanyseized
from possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra were sent to CFSL
Mumbai for making softcopies of the same for providing to
prosecutionanddefence.TheCFSLMumbaipreparedthesoftcopies
ofthe same and forwarded the same totheCourt andthosesoft
copiesofelectronicdatacontainedin16GBmemorycardofSandisk
company and Arts.1 to 41 CDs, DVDs, pendrives, harddisks were
suppliedtoprosecutionanddefence.Thisprocedurewasadoptedas
pertheobservationsmadebytheMadrasHighCourtinpara8incase
of K.RamajayamaliasAppuvInspectorofPolicereportedin
2016Cri.L.J.1542.

399] Thedatacontainedinelectronicgadgetsi.e.article
nos.1to41CDs,DVDs,Pendrives,HardDisc,Memorycardsseized
from the house of accused no.6 Saibaba is around 3 TB. During
investigationtheimportantelectronicdatacontainedintheformof
audio,videoandtextcontainedinArts.1to41likeCDs,DVDs,pen
drives, harddisks seized from the house search of accused no.6
Saibabaandthedatacontainedin16GBmemorycardofSandisk
companyintextformseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3Hem
Mishrawhichtheinvestigationofficerthoughtimportant,hesought
the mirror copies/transcript of data contained in above electronic
gadgets by letter Exhibit No.212 dated 14.9.2013 and the above
gadgets were sent to CFSL, Mumbai andScientific Expert Bhavesh
Nikam(P.W.21)examinedthesameandsuppliedthemirrorcopiesin
respect of data contained in text form in 16 GB memorycard of
Sandisk company at Exh.266 (Articles A17 to A21) and the data
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
261 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

containedinCDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks(Articlesno.1to41)
consistingofaudio,videoandtextformatisatExh.267(Pagenos.1to
247ofCFSLreport).

400] Furtheratthetimeofrecordingofstatementsofaccused
no.3 Hem Mishra, No.4 Prashant Rahi and No.6 Saibaba under
Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure the original electronic
gadgets played before the Court in presence of the accused, Shri
Gadling counsel for accused and Spl.P.P. Shri Sathainathan and in
respect of incriminating data containing the text form on which
questionswereputtotheaccusedno.3HemMishra,No.4Prashant
Rahi and No.6 Saibaba under Section 313 of Code of Criminal
Procedurethedefencesoughtforsupplyinghardcopiesofthesame
byfillingapplicationExhibitNo.246andafterdisplayingthedataon
laptopofthecourtwiththehelpofSystemAdministratorofthiscourt
Shri Atul Wasamwar printouts were taken out and copies were
suppliedtoprosecutionanddefenceandonecopyofeachdocument
waskeptonrecordandthecopiestakenoutaremarkedatArticle
nos.147to164.Furtherthevideoclipsandphotographscontainedin
above electronic gadgets were shown to concerned accused and
questions were put while recording statement u/s 313 of Code of
CriminalProcedureandtheiranswerswererecorded.

401] The Apex Court in case of Shamsher Singh Verma v.

StateofHaryanareportedin2016Cri.L.J.364heldthat

(A)CriminalP.C.(2of1974),S.294Documents
requiring no formal proof 'Document' What is
CompactdiscisadocumentItisnotnecessaryfor
courttoobtainadmissionordenialonadocument
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
262 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

under S. 294 (1) personally from accused or

complainantorwitness.

(B) CriminalP.C.(2of1974),S.294 Application

for getting exhibited compact disc Rejection of
ValidityComplainantallegingthathisminorniece
wasmolestedbyaccusedAccusedhasallegedthat
he has been implicated due to property dispute
Compact disc relating to conversation between
father of victim and son and wife of accused
regardingallegedpropertydisputeOrderrejecting
application to play compact disc in question to
enable public prosecutortoadmit ordeny,andto
get same proved from FSL Is erroneous and set
aside.

402] InviewofaboveastheCD,DVD,harddisks,pendrives,
memorycards are documents, it is necessary to consider the
provisions of Information Technology Act and Indian Evidence Act
relating to the procedure for proof of data contained in electronic
gadgetsintheformoftext,audio,photographsandvisualform.

403] Onthequestionsofimportanceofelectronicevidencein
investigationandincreasingimpactoftechnologyineverydaylife,in
TomasoBruno.vs.StateofU.P.,MANU/SC/0057/2015:(2015)7
SCC178,theApexCourtobservedthat

"25. With the advancement of information

technology,scientifictemperintheindividualandat
theinstitutionallevelistopervadethemethodsof
investigation. With the increasing impact of
technology in everyday life and as a result, the
production of electronic evidence in cases has
becomerelevanttoestablishtheguiltoftheaccused
or the liability of the defendant. Electronic
documents strictu sensu are admitted as material
evidence. With the amendment to the Indian
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
263 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

EvidenceActin2000,Sections65Aand65Bwere
introducedintoChapterVrelatingtodocumentary
evidence. Section 65A provides that contents of
electronic records may be admitted as evidence if
the criteria provided in Section 65B is complied
with.Thecomputergeneratedelectronicrecordsin
evidence are admissible at atrialifprovedin the
manner specified by Section 65B of the Evidence
Act.Subsection(1)ofSection65Bmakesadmissible
asadocument,paperprintoutofelectronicrecords
storedinopticalormagneticmediaproducedbya
computer,subjecttothefulfilmentoftheconditions
specifiedinsubsection(2)ofSection65B.Secondary
evidence of contents of document can also be led
underSection65oftheEvidenceAct.PW13stated
thathesawthefullvideorecordingofthefateful
nightintheCCTVcamera,buthehasnotrecorded
thesameinthecasediaryasnothingsubstantialto
beadducedasevidencewaspresentinit.

26.Productionofscientificandelectronicevidence
incourtascontemplatedunderSection65Bofthe
Evidence Act is of great help to the investigating
agencyandalsototheprosecution.Therelevanceof
electronic evidence is also evident in the light of
Mohd. Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab vs. State of
Maharashtra,MANU/SC/0681/2012:(2012)9SCC
1, wherein production of transcripts of internet
transactions helped the prosecution case a great
dealinprovingtheguiltoftheaccused.Similarly,in
thecaseofState(NCTofDelhi)vs.NavjotSandhu
@AfsanGuru,MANU/SC/0465/2005:(2005)11
SCC600,thelinksbetweentheslainterroristsand
themastermindsoftheattackwereestablishedonly
through phone call transcripts obtained from the
mobileserviceproviders."onlythroughcourtande
mailsprintouts.

404] Nowitisnecessarytoapplythelegalpositiontoseewhat
isadmissibleandprovedbytheprosecutioninrespectofelectronic
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
264 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

data contained in text form in 16 GB memorycard of Sandisk

company seized from accused no.3 Hem Mishra under seizure
panchnama(Exh.137)andArticlesno.1to41i.e.CDs,DVDs,pen
drives,harddisksseizedfromthehousesearchofhouseofaccused
no.6Saibaba.Iwillbeginbyscrutinizingthestatutoryprovisions.

Section 3 of the Evidence Act in subsection (2)

stipulates that documentary evidence means and
includesalldocumentsincluding"electronicrecords"
producedfortheinspectionoftheCourt.Bywayof
amendment to the Evidence Act, incorporated by
Act,No.21of2000,thefollowingwasinserted:

"The expression "Certifying Authority", "Digital

Signature","DigitalSignatureCertificate","electronic
form", "electronic records", "information", "secure
electronicrecords","secureddigital signature" and
"subscriber" shall have the meanings respectively
assignedtothemintheInformationTechnologyAct,
2000."

Section2(c)oftheInformationTechnologyAct,2000readsas

"electronic record" means data, record or data

generated,imageorsoundstored,receivedorsent
in an electronic form or micro film or computer
generatedmicrorecord."

"Section22AoftheEvidenceActreadsasfollows:

"22A. When oral admission as to contents of

electronicrecordsarerelevant.Oraladmissionsas
to the contents of electronic records are not
relevant, unless the genuineness of the electronic
recordproducedisinquestion."
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
265 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Section45AoftheEvidenceActreadsasfollows:

"45A.OpinionofExaminerofElectronicEvidence.
When in a proceeding, the court has to form an
opinion on anymatterrelatingtoanyinformation
transmittedorstoredinanycomputerresource or
anyotherelectronicordigitalform,theopinionof
the ExaminerofElectronicEvidence referredtoin
Section 79A of the Information Technology Act,
2000(21of2000),isarelevantfact.

Explanation.For the purposes of this section, an

ExaminerofElectronicEvidenceshallbeanexpert."

Section59underPartIIoftheEvidenceActdealingwithproof,reads
asfollows:

"59.Proofoffactsbyoralevidence.Allfacts,except
thecontentsofdocumentsorelectronicrecords,may
beprovedbyoralevidence."

Section65Areadsasfollows:

"65A. Specialprovisionsastoevidence relatingto

electronicrecord.Thecontentsofelectronicrecords
maybeprovedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsof
Section65B."

Section65Breadsasfollows:

"65B.Admissibilityofelectronicrecords.

(1)NotwithstandinganythingcontainedinthisAct,
any information contained in an electronic record
which is printed on a paper, stored, recorded or
copiedinopticalormagneticmediaproducedbya
computer(hereinafterreferredtoas"thecomputer
output")shallbedeemedtobealsoadocument,if
theconditionsmentionedinthissectionaresatisfied
in relation to the information and computer in
questionandshallbeadmissibleinanyproceedings,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
266 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

withoutfurtherprooforproductionoftheoriginal,
asevidenceofanycontentsoftheoriginalorofany
factstatedthereinofwhichdirectevidencewouldbe
admissible.

(2)Theconditionsreferredtoinsubsection(1)in
respectofacomputeroutputshallbethefollowing,
namely
(a)thecomputeroutputcontainingtheinformation
was produced by the computer during the period
overwhichthecomputerwasusedregularlytostore
or process information for the purposes of any
activitiesregularlycarriedonoverthatperiodbythe
person having lawful control over the use of the
computer;

(b)duringthesaidperiod,informationofthekind
contained in the electronic record or of the kind
fromwhichtheinformationsocontainedisderived
wasregularlyfedintothecomputerintheordinary
courseofthesaidactivities;

(c)throughoutthematerialpartofthesaidperiod,
thecomputerwasoperatingproperlyor,ifnot,then
in respect of any period in which it was not
operatingproperlyorwasoutofoperation during
thatpartoftheperiod,wasnotsuchastoaffectthe
electronicrecordortheaccuracyofitscontents;and

(d) the information contained in the electronic

record reproduces or is derived from such
information fed into the computer in the ordinary
courseofthesaidactivities.

(3)Whereoveranyperiod,thefunctionofstoringor
processing information for the purposes of any
activities regularly carried on over that period as
mentioned in clause (a) of subsection (2) was
regularlyperformedbycomputers,whether

(a) by a combination of computers operating over

thatperiod;or
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
267 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(b) by different computers operating in succession

overthatperiod;or
(c)bydifferentcombinationsofcomputersoperating
insuccessionoverthatperiod;or
(d) in any other manner involving the successive
operationoverthatperiod,inwhateverorder,ofone
ormorecomputersandoneormorecombinationsof
computers,allthecomputersused fort that purpose
duringthatperiodshallbetreatedforthepurposes
ofthissectionasconstitutingasinglecomputer;and
references in this section to a computer shall be
construedaccordingly.

(4)Inanyproceedingswhereitisdesiredtogivea
statement in evidence by virtue of this section, a
certificatedoinganyofthefollowingthings,thatis
tosay

(a)identifyingtheelectronicrecordcontainingthe
statementanddescribingthemannerinwhichitwas
produced;

(b)givingsuchparticularsofanydeviceinvolvedin
theproductionofthatelectronicrecordasmaybe
appropriate for the purpose of showing that the
electronicrecordwasproducedbyacomputer;

(c) dealing with any of the matters to which the

conditionsmentionedinsubsection(2)relate,and
purporting to be signed by a person occupying a
responsible official position in relation to the
operationoftherelevantdeviceorthemanagement
oftherelevantactivities(whicheverisappropriate)
shall be evidence of any matter stated in the
certificate;andforthepurposesofthissubsectionit
shallbe sufficientforamattertobe statedtothe
best of the knowledge and belief of the person
statingit.

(5)Forthepurposesofthissection

(a)informationshallbe takentobe suppliedtoa

computerifitissuppliedtheretoinanyappropriate
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
268 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

formandwhetheritissosupplieddirectlyor(with
or without human intervention) by means of any
appropriateequipment;

(b)whetherinthecourseofactivitiescarriedonby
anyofficial,informationissuppliedwithaviewto
its being stored or processed for the purposes of
those activities by a computer operated otherwise
than in the course of those activities, that
information,ifdulysuppliedtothatcomputer,shall
betakentobesuppliedtoitinthecourseofthose
activities;

(c)acomputeroutputshallbetakentohavebeen
producedbyacomputerwhetheritwasproducedby
itdirectlyor(withorwithouthumanintervention)
bymeansofanyappropriateequipment.

Explanation.For the purposes of this section any

reference to information being derived from other
informationshallbeareferencetoitsbeingderived
therefrom by calculation,kind contained in the
electronic record or of the kind from which the
information so contained is derived was regularly
fedintothecomputerintheordinarycourseofthe
saidactivities;

(c)throughoutthematerialpartofthesaidperiod,
the computer was operating properly or, if not,
then in respect of any period in which it was not
operatingproperlyorwasoutof operation during
thatpartoftheperiod,wasnotsuchasto affect
the electronic record or the accuracy of its
contents;and

(d) the information contained in the electronic

record reproduces or is derived from such
information fed into the computer in the ordinary
courseofthesaidactivities.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
269 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

405] Asperratiolaiddownbythe ApexCourt inthecaseof

Shamsher Singh Verma v. State of Haryana reported in 2016
Cri.L.J.364,the16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyseizedfrom
thepersonalsearchofaccusedno.3HemMihraandtheelectronic
gadgets Arts.1 to 41 like CDs, DVDs, pendrives, harddisks seized
from the house search of accused no.6 Saibaba are incriminating
material, contained data in the form of audio, video, text and
photographsanditisrequiredtobeputtotheconcernedaccusedin
theirstatementsu/s313ofCodeofCriminalProcedure.TheMadras
HighCourtinthecaseofK.RamajayamaliasAppuvInspectorof
Policereportedin2016Cri.L.J.1542hasheldthat

A] EvidenceAct(1of1872),S.3 'Document'
ArticleslikeMemoryCard,HardDisc,CD,Pendrive,
etc., containing relevant data in electronic form
Are 'documents' as defined under S. 3 albeit,
marking them as material objects After all,
nomenclature cannot have effect of altering
characteristicsofobject(Para8)

B] Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S. 65B Electronic

recordReceivedbyMagistrateinpetitionfiledby
prosecution He can take a back up, without
disturbingintegrityofsource,inaCDorPendriveor
anyothergadget,bydrawingproceedingsBackup
canbekeptinsafecustodybywrappingitinanti
staticcoverandshouldbesenttoSessionsCourtat
timeofcommittal(Para8)

C] Evidence Act (1 of 1872) Ss. 62, 3

Documentary evidence Court has power to view
CCTVfootageandvideorecordings,beitprimaryor
legallyadmissiblesecondaryevidenceInpresence
of accused for satisfying itself as to whether
individualseeninfootageisaccusedindock.
(Para8)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
270 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

D] Criminal P.C.(2 of 1974), S. 313

Examination of accused Trial Court should
specifically put questions to accused about
specificallyputquestionstoaccusedabouthisovert
acts appearing in CCTV footage and record his
answers.(Para8).

406] The Delhi High Court in case of Kishan Tripathi alias

KishanPaintervStatereportedin2016(3)ADR495, observed
that
Evidence Act (1 of 1872) S. 65B, 60 CCTV
footage Evidentiary value Murder of security
guardinfactoryEvidenceonrecordshowingthat
no one was watching CCTV footage when it was
being recorded and recording was result of
commands or instruction already given and
programmedOriginalharddisctherefore would
enjoyauniquepositionandcouldbereliedonas
primaryevidence.PenalCode(45of1860),S.300.
(Paras13,14,15)

407] TheobservationsofDelhiHighCourtinParanos.12and
13ofthesaidjudgmentarereproducedasunder:

[12] Pertinently,inordertoreassureandverify,
wehadcalledfortheoriginalharddiscfromthe
malkhana. The same was produced in a sealed
cover with court seals. The said seals were
inspectedbythecounselfortheappellantKishan
Tripathi.Thisharddiscwasattachedtoacomputer
byoneNeerajandCCTVfootagewasplayedinthe
Court for our examination and visual viewing.
Counselswerealsoallowedtowatchandseethe
relevantportionsofthevideofiles.Filesfromthe
saidharddiscwerecopiedintwopendrivesof8
GB each marked Exhibits HC1 and HC2.
Thereafter,theoriginalharddiscwasdetachedand
resealedinthepresenceoftheCourtMasterand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
271 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

returnedtotheAdditionalPublicProsecutortobe
depositedinthemalkhana.Wehadalsoplayedthe
twoCDsavailableonthetrialcourtrecordonthe
laptop.

[13] The CCTV footage, which was directly and

immediately stored in the hard drive of the
computer is the original media, that was self
generated and created without any human
intervention. This CCTV footage is not secondary
evidence anddoesnot require certification under
Section65BoftheEvidenceAct.Thisissueisno
longerresintegraandissettledinthedecisionof
theSupremeCourtin AnwarP.V.(S)v.P.K.Basir,
(2014)10SCC473,whichhold:
"24.Thesituationwouldhavebeendifferenthad
theappellantadducedprimaryevidence,bymaking
available in evidence, the CDs used for
announcementandsongs.HadthoseCDsusedfor
objectionable songs or announcements been duly
got seized through the police or Election
Commission and had the same been used as
primary evidence, the High Court could have
played the same in court to see whether the
allegationsweretrue.Thatisnotthesituationin
thiscase.Thespeeches,songsandannouncements
were recorded using other instruments and by
feeding them into a computer, CDs were made
therefromwhichwereproducedincourt,without
duecertification.ThoseCDscannotbeadmittedin
evidence since the mandatory requirements of
Section65BoftheEvidenceActarenotsatisfied.It
is clarified that notwithstanding what we have
stated herein in the preceding paragraphs on the
secondary evidence of electronic record with
reference to Sections 59, 65A and 65B of the
EvidenceAct,ifanelectronicrecordassuchisused
asprimaryevidence.

408] In order to ascertain whether there is any alteration,

change or tampering with the said electronic devices i.e. 16 GB
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
272 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

MemoryCardofSandiskcompany(Exh.137)andelectronicgadgets
i.e.CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisks(Articlesno.1to41),Courthas
asked specific question to Scientific Officer of Cyber Crime P.W.21
BhaveshNikamwhichisreproducedasunder:

CourtQuestion

Que. WhetherExh.1isaoriginalmemorycardand
Exh.1to25containsalltheelectronicdigitalstorage
media like pen drives, CDS, DVDs, memory cards,
laptops harddisks, etc. which contains document
files,mediai.e.audio,video.Whatyoucan say
abouttheoriginalexistenceofthefileintextvisual,
audioandvideoformatintheabovefilesandchanges
occurringinthe same?

Answer: In reply to the said question, Scientific

OfficerP.W.21Bhavesh Nikamansweredthathedid
notobserveanysuchchanges,additionortampering
relatedtothefilespresentintheexhibitprovidedand
based on file signatures analysis, link file analysis,
prefetch analysis, system information, MFT details,
registry analysis, time stamp analysis and USB
analysis,hecametotheconclusionthatthereareno
suchchangesintext,audioandvideo.

409] Theelectronicgadgetsi.e.16GBmemorycardofSandisk
companyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishraand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
273 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Articlesno.1to41i.e.CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisksseizedfrom
thehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabawereproducedbeforethe
Courtandelectronicdatacontainedthereinisinprimaryformandin
viewofevidenceofScientificExpertBhaveshNikam(P.W.21)thereis
nochange,alterationortamperinginit.

410] Thequestionswereputfromtheincriminatingelectronic
datacontainedinelectronicgadgetsintheformoftext,audio,video
form to accused nos.3 Hem Mishra, No.4 Prashant Rahi and No.6
Saibabaintheirstatementsu/s313of CodeofCriminalProcedure.
The mirrorimages received from CFSL, Mumbai in respect of
electronicdatacontainedin16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompany
seizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishraandArts.1to
41i.e.CDs,DVDs,pendrivesandharddisksseizedfromthehouse
searchofaccusedno.6Saibabaweresuppliedbypassinganorderon
Exh.145on412016inviewofjudgmentofMadrasHighCourtin
the case of K. Ramajayam alias Appu v Inspector of Police
reportedin2016Cri.L.J.1542andDelhiHighCourtinthecaseof
KishanTripathialiasKishanPaintervStatereportedin2016(3)
ADR495.

411] Original16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyseized
fromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishraandArts.1to41i.e.
CDs,DVDs,pendrivesandharddisksseizedfromthehousesearchof
accusedno.6SaibabawereplayedonthelaptopoftheCourtwiththe
helpofSystemAdministratorofthisCourtShriAtulWasamwarand
Shri Rawrane, Police Officer who was not connected with
investigation of the present case and questions in respect of
incriminatingdataintheformoftextwereputtoaccusedno.3Hem
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
274 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Mishra,no.4PrashantRahiandno.6SaibabainpresenceofSpl.P.P.
ShriSathianathanandlearnedAdvocatesofthedefenceShriGadling,
ShriJagdishMeshramandShriNarendraNarnaware.

412] This Court is provided with the laptop and computers

havingUbuntuoperatingsystemandthecomputersectionwiththe
laptop and computers having Windows operating system. Initially
whileopeningtextfileinUbuntusomechangesinparasettinglike
changes in paragraphs and line spacing was noticed, but when
reopened in Windows operating system no changes was noticed.
Somefilesin16GBmemorycardandharddiskwereprotectedby
uniquepasswords.ThosepasswordswerementionedinCFSLreport
(Exhs.266 and 267). With the help of those passwords the data
containedin16GBmemorycardandArts.1to41wasopened.

413] Somefilesinthetextformatevencouldnotbeopenedby
CFSL,Mumbaiaspasswordcouldnotberetrieved. Oneharddisk
seizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.6Saibabawascrushedand
thedatacontainedthereincouldnotberetrievedbyCFSLandthis
factisalsomentionedintheCFSLreport(Exh.267). Somefilesin
text format in 16 GB memorycard seized from the possession of
accusedno.3HemMishraandharddiskseizedfromthehousesearch
of accused no.6 Saibaba were opened with the help of partition
Guru software by Shri Rawrane. Some files in text formate were
openedwiththehelpofcomputeroperatingsystemWindows.

414] Inrespectofevidenceofelectronicdataspecificquestions
wereputtoaccusedno.6Saibabaandhisstatementu/s313ofCode
ofCriminalProcedurewasrecordedcontinuouslyforaperiodofthree
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
275 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

days i.e. on 3.10.2016, 4.10.2016 and 5.10.2016. Saibaba is 90%

disabled and he was not able to sit. He filed an application at
Exh.440 for recording his further statement u/s 313 of Code of
CriminalProcedure andinthepresenceofhisAdvocates.Inview of
JudgmentofApexCourtincaseofBasavarajR.Patilandothers.v.
State of Karnataka and others reported in AIR 2000 Supreme
Court3214,bypassinganorder,theapplicationatExh.440filedby
accusedno.6Saibaba,forrecordinghisfurtherstatementthroughhis
Advocates Shri Surendra Gadling, Shri Jagdish Meshram, Shri
NarendraNarnawarewasallowedandthattheremainingquestions
u/s313 CodeofCriminalProcedure wererecordedon18.10.2016,
19.10.2016,20.10.2016throughhisadvocatesandtheelectronicdata
inaudio,videoandtextformwasplayedonthelaptopoftheCourtin
presenceofSpl.P.P.ShriSathianathanandthelearnedcounselsShri
Surendra Gadling, Shri Jagdish Meshram and Shri Narendra
Narnaware.

415] The learned Advocate Shri Gadling submitted that

prosecution failed to prove the contents and ownership of the
documentsallegedtobefoundintheseizedelectronicgadgets(Arts.1
to41)allegedtobeseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
Saibaba on 12.9.2013. He submitted that the contents of the
documents allegedly seizedfromthe housesearchofaccusedno.6
Saibabahasnotbeenprovedbytheprosecutionandnowitnesswas
examined by the prosecution to prove the contents of the said
documentsanditistritethatanaccusedcannotbeconfrontedduring
the questioning u/s 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure with any
circumstanceswhichwerenotinevidence.Section313oftheCodeof
CriminalProcedureisnotintendedtobeusedasaninterrogation.It
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
276 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

wasarguedthatthecontentsofthedocumentswhichhasnotbeen
provedbytheprosecutionmaynotbepickedandputtotheaccused
undersection313ofCodeofCriminalProcedureandcornerhimfor
giving an answer favourable or unfavourable. This cannot be
permittedbylaw. Insupporthissubmissionheplacedrelianceon
thefollowingjudgments

[i] The ApexCourt inthecaseof KalpanathRaivsState

(ThroughCBI)reportedin(1997)8SCC732observedthat

Cr.P.C. S.313 Examination of accused

CircumstancesnotappearinginEvidencecannotbe
puttotheaccusedLetterswrittenbytheaccusedto
the Court from jail during pretrial periodLetters
not adduced as evidence through any procedure
knowntolawCourtnotjustifiedinputtingthose
letterstotheaccusedduringhisexamination.

[ii] BankofIndiav.M/s.AllibhoyMohammadreportedin
AIR2008Bombay81itisheldthat:
Thesettledprincipleoflawhasbeenapprovedby
theBombayHighCourtWhereintheHonbleCourt
held that Evidence Act, Ss.61,62,63Documentary
EvidenceDocument produced as primary or
SecondaryevidenceHastobeprovedinmannerlaid
downinSs.67to73.Atpara25itwasheldthat:

25. Where the execution of the document like

promissory note was denied, it is required to be
proved through the scribe, where the truth of the
factsstatedintheaffidavitisinissuemereproofof
handwritingandexecutionofthedocumentwould
notfurnishevidenceofthetruthofthefactsstated
inthedocumentorcontents.Truthorotherwiseof
the facts or contents so stated would have to be
provedbyadmissibleevidence,i.e.bytheevidence
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
277 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

of person who can vouchsafe for the truth of the

facts in issue as held by the Apex Court in Ramji
DayawalaandSonsPvt.Ltd.vs.InvestImport,AIR
1981, SC 2085. Person with knowledge must be
examined. Everydocumentshouldfirstbestarted
bysomeproofbeforethepersonwhodisputedthat
documentcaninanywaybeconsideredasproved
because its genuineness is not disputed by the
oppositeparty.Documentsdonotprovethemselves.

Furtherinpara33itisheldthat

33. Asalreadystatedhereinabovetheproduction
ofthedocumentpurportingtohavebeensignedor
written by a certain person is no evidence of its
authorship.Itisnecessarytoprovetheirgenuiness
andexecution.Proof,therefore,hastobegivenof
the handwriting, signature and execution of a
document.Nowritingcanbereceivedinevidence
asagenuineone,andnoneasaforgeryuntilithas
beenprovedtobeaforgery.Awritingbyitself,is
not evidence of the one thing or the other. A
writing, by itself, is evidence of nothing, and
therefore is not, unless accompanied by proof of
somesort,admissibleasevidence.

[iii] RamjiDayawalaandSonsPvt.Ltd.vs.InvestImport,
AIR1981,SC2085itisheldthat

undoubtedly, if the truth of the facts stated in a

documentisinissuemereproofofthehandwriting
andexecutionofthedocumentwouldnotfurnish
evidenceofthetruthofthefactsorcontentsofthe
document. The truth or otherwise of the facts or
contents so stated would have to be proved by
admissible evidence i.e. by the evidence of those
personswhocanvouchsafeforthetruthofthefacts
inissue.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
278 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

[iv] Sir
Mohammed Yusuf and another v.
D
and another
reportedinAIR1968BOMBAY112whereinitisheldthat

(A) Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S.47, S.60, S.61,

S.67 Proof of contents of document Proof of
contents of documents by proving signature
Whetherpermissible.

Theevidenceofthecontentscontainedinthe
document is hearsay evidence unless the writer
thereofisexaminedbeforetheCourt.Anattemptto
provethecontentsofthedocumentbyprovingthe
signatureorthehandwritingoftheauthorthereof
is to set at naught the well recognised rule that
hearsay evidence cannot be admitted. AIR 1954
Bom305,Rel.on;AIR1957SC857.Ref.

Eveniftheentiredocumentisheldformally
proved, that does not amount to a proof of the
truth of the contents of the document. The only
person competent to give evidence on the
truthfulnessoftheContentsofthedocumentisthe
writerthereof.

Para 42 The reason on which the decision of

Bhagwati, J. is based is not far to seek. The
evidenceofthecontentscontainedinthedocument
is hearsay evidence unless the writer thereof is
examinedbeforetheCourt.We,therefore,holdthat
theattempttoprovethecontentsofthedocument
byprovingthesignatureorthehandwritingofthe
author thereof is to set at nought the well
recognised rule that hearsay evidence cannot be
admitted. This question has been discussed by
Halsbury at paragraph 533 at p. 294 (Halsbury's
Law of England, 3rd Edition, Vol. 15) under the
heading'Hearsay'SaysHalsbury:"......Statements
in documents may also be hearsay. So, if A had
takencounsel'sopinionbeforeacting,thecontents
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
279 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

of the opinion would be admissible for the same

purpose, but not to prove the truth of any
statement of fact therein". In paragraph (534)
Halsburyhasdiscussedthereasonsforrejectionof
hearsayevidenceandsays:"Thereasonsadvanced
fortherejectionofhearsayarenumerous,among
them being the irresponsibility of the original
declarant,thedepreciationoftruthintheprocess
ofrepetition,theopportunitiesforfraudwhichits
admission would offer, and the waste of time
involvedinlistening'toidlerumour.

416] InviewoftheobservationsmadebytheApexCourtinthe
case of Shamsher Singh Verma v. State of Haryana reported in
2016Cri.L.J.364inparano.14observedthat

The endorsement of admission or denial made by

thecounselfordefence,onthedocumentfiledby
the prosecution or on the application/report with
which same is filed, is sufficient compliance of
Section294ofCr.P.C.Similarlyonadocumentfiled
bythedefenceendorsementofadmissionordenial
by the public prosecutor is sufficient and defence
willhavetoprovethedocumentifnotadmittedby
theprosecution.

417] Atthisjuncture,itisnecessarytoconsidertheratiolaid
downby the ChhattisgarhHighCourt inthecaseof AsitKumar
Sen Gupta v State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2012 Cri.L.J.
(NOC)384(Chh)whereinitisobservedthat

Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) S. 124A

ChhattisgarhVisheshJansurakshaAdhiniyam(14of
2006),S.8UnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act
(37of1967),Ss.18,39(2)Chargeofsedition
Proof Accused found exciting and encouraging
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
280 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

people to wage war against Govt. by armed

rebellionLoadsofnaxalliteraturesseizedfrom
possession of accused Accused used to invite
people to join CPI (ML) Peoples War and CPI
(Maoist)OrganisationsConvictionofaccusedfor
offenceschargedproper.

418] TheobservationofChattisgarhHighCourtinpara37,56,
and57arematerial.Thesearereproducedareasunder

37.Thereisothercorroborativematerialtosupport
thefindingrecordedaboveinasmuchastheloads
and loads of naxal literatures seized from the
possessionoftheappellantcontainswriting,textof
speeches etc. of naxal leaders/activists exhorting
violence and revolution against the Government
established by law by means of armed rebellion.
Onesuchdocumentistitledas(Vernaularmatter
omitted.ed.) to mean letter by the Company
Commander from the war field. It is written by
some `Hidmal and addressed to comrade
`Jangudada and starts with`red salute.It gives
graphicdescriptionofanincidentwhichtookplace
at Errabore camp in the naxal affected area of
DantewadainChhattisgarhinthemorningof9th
July,2007.Itloudskillingofpolicemenwhichisa
symbolatthatleveloftheGovernmentestablished
by law. It also gives the details of arms and
ammunitions looted from the police. There is
another letter on record written by one Ganpati,
GeneralSecretaryoftheCommunistPartyofIndia
(Maoist)addressedtocomradeHidmalandSingla.
This letter appears to be a reply to the letter
written by Hidmal to Jangudada on 11th July,
2007, contents of which have been mentioned
above.Italsopraises/loudskillingofpolicemenat
Errabore by referring to the incident which has
taken place in different parts of the country like
Kalinga Nagar, Singoore and Nandigram etc. The
otherliteraturesinthenameof`LalPataka,`Lal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
281 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Chingari etc. have also been seized from the

possessionoftheappellant.Onebookissuedbythe
CPI(MarxistLeninist)hasalsobeenseizedwhich
giveshistoryoftheorganization,itsgoalandthe
constitutionofparty.Fromthesedocumentsalso,it
clearly emerges that the appellant, who was
inciting the witnesses to join naxal forces for
wagingwaragainsttheGovernmentestablishedby
law by means of armed rebellion was also in
possessionofhugevolumesofnaxalliteraturesin
which such articles louding naxal violence are
contained. In viewof this,it cannot be saidthat
presentisasimplecaseofapersonfoundtobein
possession of some naxal literature or literature
advocating leftist ideology as claimed by the
appellant.

56.InVolumeIIIofthepaperbookswhichhave
beenpreparedfromthematerialstoredintheCPU
of the computer belonging to the appellant,
minutesofspecialconferenceofCPI(ML)Peoples
Warisavailable.Thedocumentcontainsviewsof
the delegates and formation of new Central
Committee.Itspeaksofmilitarystrategyorpathof
the Indian Revolution which is the path of
protracted peoples war i.e. liberating the
countrysidefirstthroughareawiseseizureofpower,
establishing guerrilla zones and base areas and
then encircling the cities and finally capturing
power throughout the country. The document
further declares It should be pointed out that
destructionoftheenemyistheprimaryobjectof
war and selfpreservation the secondary, because
onlybydestroyingtheenemyinlargenumberscan
one effectivelypreserve oneself.Therefore attack,
the chief means of destroying the enemy, is
primary,whiledefence,asupplementarymeansof
destroying the enemy and a means of self
preservation, is secondary. In actual warfare the
chiefrole isplayedbydefence muchofthe time
andbyattackfortherestofthetime,butifwaris
taken as a whole, attack remains primary. This
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
282 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

documentisatpage706ofVolumeIIIofthepaper
books.Atpage716,listofmartyrsofthepeoples
warofNepalisprovided.Elsewhereinthevolume,
supportprovidedbytheCPI(ML)PeoplesWarand
MCCfromIndiahasbeengreetedbythebanned
NepaliMaoist.

57.VolumeVofthepaperbooksistranscriptofthe
materialbytheCentralForensicLaboratorystored
in the CPU found from the possession of the
appellantwhichcontainsthedocumentsregarding
building and development of Peoples Guerilla
Army in India at page 1102. The press release
issued by the CPI (Maoist) on 4122004 is
availableatpage1138.Thispressreleasehasbeen
issued by Ganapati, General Secretary, Central
Committee(Provisional)ofCPI(Maoist).Thename
ofthisGanapatiisfoundintwootherletterswhich
thisCourthasalreadydiscussedinthepreceding
partofthisjudgment.Atpage1141ofVolumeVof
thepaperbooks,thedetailsofmeetingoftheJoint
Central Committee held in September, 2004 is
provided and the points of differences for the
debate in the forth coming Congress of the CPI
(Maoist)havebeenhighlighted.Thisdocumentis
dated 10102005. Elsewhere also,theactivities,
minutes,pointsofdebateetc.ofthemeetingofCPI
(Maoist),aterroristorganizationasalsoabanned
organizationarecontainedinthisvolume.Inmost
of the documents, the revolutionary path
undertaken by the Maoist which are popularly
known as Naxalites waging Guerrilla war in the
interior forest areas of the State has been
appreciated and louded. The appellant claims
himself to be a writer and has also published a
booknamely`AWorldtoWin,theonlyissueof
which was published probably in the year 2006,
thoughtheentirebookisconspicuouslysilentasto
thedateofpublicationorthedateofprintingetc.
Neitherbeforenorafterthisissue,anyotherissue
ofthemagazinehaseverseenthelightoftheday
andthisfactiscandidlyadmittedbytheappellant
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
283 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

inhisexamination.

419] Intheabovereportedcaseseveralletters,correspondence
between members of banned organization were seized from the
possession of accused and further CPU containing several text
documentswasseizedfromhousesearchofaccusedandtheCPUwas
send to CFL, Hyderabad and CFL Hyderabad retrieved the text
documents contained in CPU and transcripts of those were made
availablebeforetheCourtandtheCourtreliedonthesaidtranscripts
asadocumentsaddressedbyaccused.

420] Thefactsofthepresentcaseandfactsofthecasecited
supraaresame.InthepresentcasenaxalpamphletsArticles139to
141wereseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedNo.1to3.Further
fromthepossessionofaccusedPrashantRahi8documentsrelatingto
naxalliteraturealongwithtypewrittenpapersofundertrialMaoist
leader Narayan Sanyal at Art.130A were seized. From the house
search of accused Saibaba, the letter dated 31 July 2012, printed
letterdated7June2012ofGreenhuntoperationofRDF,15pages
writtenonPeopleHeroComradeKishanji,informationbooknamedas
Thearrested,peoplemarchdt8August2007,bookletmagzine39
and41,42,printedtelugubook,colourphotoofnaxal,bookletLal
Salam,prashenbabuMaowadiNahiandTelugumagzineetc.were
seized. Besides,this the16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompany
containing text documents seized from the possession of accused
No.3 Hem Mishra vide panchanama Exh.137 was sent to CFSL,
MumbaiforexaminationandtheCFSL,Mumbaiexaminedthesame
andsentthemirrorcopiesofthetextdocumentscontainedin16GB
memorycardtoSDPOSuhasBawche. Hehadtakenouttheprint
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
284 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

outsof5documentsArt.17to21andthoseweresenttoCFSLfor
certificationtoCFSL,MumbaiandP.W.21BhaveshNikamcertifiedthe
sameandfowardedtoP.W.11BawchealongwithCFSLreportExh.266.

421] Theharddiscscontainingtextdocuments,videoclipsand
photographsweresenttoCFSLforexaminationandCFSL,Mumbai
examined the same and forwarded the mirror copies of text
documentsintheharddisks. Thereafter,P.W.11SuhasBawchetook
outprintoutsabout247pagesfromthemirrorimagessuppliedto
himandsentittoCFSL,MumbaiforcertificationandP.W.21Bhavesh
Nikam certified the same and forwarded to P.W.11 Suhas Bawche
alongwithCFSLreportExh.267.InviewofobservationofChhatisgarh
HighCourtinAsit'scase(citedsupra),thosedocumentscanberead
inevidence.

422] Atthisjuncture,itisnecessarytoconsidertheratiolaid
downinthecaseof AshishC.Shahv.
M/s.ShethDevelopersPvt.

Ltd.andOrsreportedin2011Cr.L.J.3565whereinitisobserved
inpara12that
(E)EvidenceAct(1of1872),S.135Examination
ofwitnessesProsecutioncanneveraskaccusedto
enterintowitnessboxaswitnessofprosecutionIt
isagainstbasicprinciplesofcriminaljurisprudence.
(Para12)

Para 12. The learned Counsel for the petitioner

vehementlycontendedthatthedocumentcouldnot
beadmittedinevidenceunlessauthorofthesame
was examined before the Court and in support of
this contention, he relied upon Vishwanath Rai v.
Sachhidamand Singh, AIR 1971 SC 1949. In that
case, witness of one party deposed that a letter
writtenbyoneStohimhadbeenreceivedbyhim.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
285 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

TheSupremeCourtheldthatburdenliesonother
sidetoproveitsallegationthattheletterwasnot
writtenbySorthatitwaswrittenincollusionwith
Sandthewitness.However,theSupremeCourtalso
heldthattheletterisrelevantandadmissibletothe
extentofthefactthatSwrotesuchalettertothe
witness with its contents. However, correctness of
thecontentsoftheletterwouldbeprovedonlyby
examiningSasawitnessbecausehewastheauthor.
Inthepresentcase,theauthorandsignatoriesofthe
abovereferredtwolettersareaccusedNos.1and2.
Theletterspurportingtohavebeensignedandsent
bythemwerereceivedbytheManagingDirectorof
the complainant and this fact is deposed to by
witnessSharadDoshi.Inviewofthis,iftheaccused
personsallegethatthesaidletterswerenotsigned
and sent by the accused persons, burden lies on
them to prove the same. The contention of the
learnedCounselthatthecontentsofthisdocument
andthetruthforthesamecannotbeprovedwithout
examining the author of the same is against the
basic principles of criminal jurisprudence, because
prosecutioncanneverasktheaccusedtoenterinto
witnessboxasawitnessofprosecution.Infact,the
accusedcannotbecalledinthewitnessboxevenas
defencewitnessunlesshemakesawrittenrequest
forthesame.Notonlythis,eveninthestatement
under Sec. 313, Cr.P.C. wherein the incriminating
circumstancesarerequiredtobeputtotheaccused
toenable himtoexplainthesame,theaccusedis
not bound to answer those questions, though the
Courtmaydrawadverseinferenceagainsthimifhe
keepsquiet.Insuchcircumstances,tosuggestthat
thedocumentwrittenbyandsignedbytheaccused
couldnotbeprovedwithoutexaminingtheaccused
aswitnessoftheprosecutionisagainstthesettled
positionoflawandthereforethiscontentionofthe
learned Counsel for the petitioner is liable to be
rejected.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
286 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

423] Thefactsofthecasescitedsupraandthecaseinhandare
identical.Inthepresentcase,thedocumentscontainedinelectronic
data contained in CDs, DVDs, pendrives and harddisks and data
containedin16GBmemorycardwasfoundintheharddisksseized
fromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6andseveralletterswrittenby
accusedno.6SaibababyusinghispseudonamePrakashaddressedto
ComradesofCPI(Maoist)werefoundinharddisksaswellasin16
GBmemorycardcardandifheallegesthatthesaidletterswerenot
signedorsentbyhim,burdenofprovingthesameisontheaccused
asthesaidfactiswellwithintheknowledgeoftheaccused.Hence,in
viewofjudgmentofApexCourtinthecaseof AshishC.Shahv
ShethDevelopersPvt.Ltd.reportedin2011CRILJ3565,(cited
supra),itisnotthedutyofprosecutiontoasktheaccusedtoenter
intowitnessboxaswitnessofprosecution.

424] In view of above I have no hesitation to hold that the

electronic data in text form contained in 16 GB memorycard of
Sandisk company seized from the personal search of accused no.3
HemMishraandelectronicdataintext,videoclipsandphotographs
found in Articles 1 to 41 CDs, DVDs,pendrives,harddisksseized
from the house search of accused no.6 Saibaba can be read in
evidence.

425] Itisimportanttonotethatwhenthedocumentsare
provedaccordingtothelawitcanbereadinevidence.Meremarking
thedocumentswithArticlesnumberdoesnotprecludetheCourtfrom
takingintoconsiderationwhenitisdulyproved.Asdiscussedabove,
themirrorcopiesofdatacontainedintextformin16GBmemory
cardofSandiskcompanyseizedfrompersonalsearchofaccusedno.3
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
287 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Hem Mishra were filed by prosecution alongwith CFSL report at

Exh.266 and those were prepared by P.W.21 Bhavesh Nikam by
retrievingthedatacontainedintextformfromthe16GBmemory
cardofSandiskcompanyandthesaid16GBmemorycardofSandisk
companyisapartofmuddemalpropertyanditisbeforetheCourt
andatthetimeofrecordingofstatementundersection313ofCode
ofCriminalProcedureofaccusedno.3HemMishrathesaiddocument
wasopenedonthelaptopoftheCourtinthepresenceofaccused
no.3 Hem Mishra, his Advocate Shri Gadling and Spl PP Shri
Sathainathan and it was compared alongwith the mirrorcopies of
Articles no.A17 to A21 attached to CFSL report Exh.266. Same
procedurewasadoptedinrespectofviewingthedatacontainedin
audio,videoandtextforminCDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddisksat
Arts.no.1to41seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba
and to that effect the prosecution filed on record the CFSL report
Exh.267containingpages247.

426] FurthertheprintoutsofArt.147to164weretakenatthe
instanceoftheaccusedvideapplicationExh.246andtheprintouts
weretakenfromoriginalharddiskproducedbeforetheCourtandthe
datacontainedinsaidelectronicgadgetswasviewedinpresenceof
learneddefenceAdvocateShriGadling,SplPPShriSathainathanand
accused.Hence,meremarkingofsomedocumentsasArticlenumber
does not debar the court from reading the said document in the
evidence. Though, the saiddocumentswere markedasarticlesas
discussed above they were proved properly. At this juncture it is
necessarytoconsiderratiolaiddownbytheBombayHighCourtin
caseofBamaKathariPatil.v.RohidasArjunMadhaviandanother
reportedin2004(2)Mh.L.J.752whereinitisobservedthat
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
288 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Civil Procedure Code, O.13, R.4 Proof of

document Exhibitingofdocumentincourtisan
administrativeactIthasnothingtodowithproof.

Exhibitingofdocumentisanadministrativeact. A
document which is produced in the Court is
ordinarily exhibited only after its proof. But,
exhibiting a document does not mean that the
documentisprovedandnonexhibitingadocument
doesnotmeanthatthedocumentisnotproved.A
document is required to be proved in accordance
withtheprovisionsoftheEvidenceAct.Merely,for
administrativeconvenienceoflocatingoridentifying
adocument,itisgivenanexhibitnumberincourts.
Exhibitingadocumenthasnothingtodowiththe
proofthough,asamatterofconvenience,onlythe
proved documents are exhibited. Since, the
documentinquestionhasbeenexhibitedafterthe
crossexaminationoftheplaintiff,itisopentothe
petitioner/defendant to contend at the stage of
arguments that the document (agreement) though
exhibited has not been proved by the plaintiff in
accordancewithlaw.(Paras3and4).

427] Further the Madras High Court in the case of K.

RamajayamaliasAppuvInspectorofPolicereportedin2016
Cri.L.J.1542, inpara8observedthatArticleslikememorycard,
HardDisc,CD,Pendrive,etc.containingrelevantdatainelectronic
formaredocumentsasdefinedunderS.3albeit,markingthemas
material objects. After all, nomenclature cannot have effect of
alteringcharacteristicsofobject. Inviewofabovedocumentsitis
clearthatthedatacontainedintext,videoclips,photographscanbe
consideredasevidenceinthiscase.

428] Theincriminatingevidenceintextformcontainedin16
GB memorycard of Sandisk company which was seized from the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
289 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

possessionofaccusedno.3HemMishrawhichareatArticlesA17to
A21asunder:

Documentsinrespectofaccusedno.3HemMishrafoundin16
GBmemorycardofSandiskCompanyseizedfromhispossession.

429] ProsecutionhasreliedontheprintoutsAnnexuresArt.A
17toA21takenoutfrom16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompany
seizedfrom the possessionofaccusedno.3HemMishrawhichare
produced alongwith CFSL report Exh.266 shows the incriminating
materialagainsttheaccusedwhichareasfollows:

(1) Onperusalofprintoutofletterat Art.A17 of

Exh.266 (in Hindi language) addressed to Lal
Salam by J.V. about the Uttara Khand that the
position of Uttara Khand was not proper and
therefore,somedifficultiesaroseintheworkofparty
andhealongwithoneotherpersonremovedfrom
theparty andthereasonforremovalisthelower
levelandinspiteofthatheisworkingintheparty
honestly.Itwasfurthersuggestedtointerfereinthe
matterinordertosolvetheproblems.Thisletteris
in Hindi language. Contents of the same read as
under:
LkkFkh]
yky lyke]! vk'kk gS vki LoLFk gksaxs] ;agk Uk es
fLFkrh;k fBd ugh py jgh gS] iqjkuh leL;k cuh gqbZ gSA
ftlds dkj.k dke es dbZ ck/kk vk jgh gSA nqljs lkfFk;ksa
dk n`Vhdksu tu laxBu o tu vkUnksyu ds izfr igys
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
290 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

tSlk gh gSA ftlds dkj.k vUrj fojks/k iSnk gks jgs gSA
eq>s o pk- dks Pus fudyk fn;k gSA fudkyus ds fiNs tks
dkj.k gS og cgwr gh fupys ntsZ ds >wBs vkjksi gSA tcfd
mu lkfFk;ks dks n`Vhdksu rks igys tSlk gh cuk gqvk gSA
mu lkfFk;ksa dh xyfr;ksa ckotwn ge dke dks pyk;s gq;s
gSA ysfdu U.K. dh ifjfLFkrh;ks o tu laxBuks o tu
vkUnksyu ds izfr muds lafdu lksp ds dkj.k dke dks
vkxs c<kus es fnDdrs vk jgh gSA ftlds ckjs es cgl
pyk;h x;h rks fyf[kr cgl pyk;h x;h rks ge nksuks
dks fudky fn;k x;k gSA blds ckotqn ge nksuks lefiZr
Hkko ls dke dj jgs gSA
vki ls vuqjks/k gS fd vki bles rRdky gLr{ksi dj
leL;k ds lek/kku djs ftlls dke dks vkxs c<kus es vk
jgh fnDdrs nwj dh tk ldsA vHkh eS cgwr gh la{ksi es
vkiuh ckr fy[k jgk gwWa] vk'kk gS vki iqjkuh leL;k dh
otg dks tkurs gS blfy;s leL;k dks vPNh rjgls le{k
x;s gksaxsA
yky lyke
t-ch-
(2) On perusal of Art.A18 of Exh.266 it reveals
that it is addressed to Jan Sanghathan and
SanyuktaMorchabyN.R.B.inwhichitissuggested
tomakeeffortabout strengtheningandexpanding
the party and to struggle against repression, in
developing campaigns and unlawful organization
and lastly to support all antiimperialist struggles
and peoples' wars on the international level. The
saidletterisinHindilanguagewhichisreproduced
asunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
291 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

tul ax Buks a vkS j l a; q D r eks p kZ l ax Buks a es a

dk;Z j r dkejs M ks a ds uke ,u-vkj-ch- dk i=

gekjh ikVhZ ] mld s u sr ` R o e s a tkjh kfUrdkjh

vkUnk sy u vkS j vU;kU; tukUnk sy uk s a ij jkT; d s
ccZ j o pkS r jQk vke.k ijkLr dju s g sr q turk
dk s rS ; kj dj s a !

ikVhZ vkS j ih,yth, dk s kfDrkkyh dju s g sr q

turk dh lf; Hk wf edk dk s lq f ufpr dj s a vkS j
kfUrdkjh tuvkUnk sy uk s a dk s ubZ m aW pkb;k s a rd
fodflr dj s a !!

fn- 18@8@2013

fiz; dkejsMks]
vki lHkh vPNh rjg tkurs gSa fd vkt gekjh ikVhZ] ih,yth,
vkSj kfUrdkjh tuleqnk; ij] gekjh ikVhZ ds usr`Ro esa tkjh kfUrdkjh
vkUnksyu ij vkSj lkFk gh vU;kU; tuvkanksyuksa ij jkT; dk ,d
pkSrjQk] ccZj o vR;Ur gh fgalz vke.k iwjs tksj&kksj ls py jgk gSA
gekjs f[kykQ vkSj Hkkjr dh kfUrdkjh turk ds f[kykQ bl
neu&vfHk;ku dk tks nk;jk gS] mldh tks rhozrk gS] u`kalrk gS vkSj
bl e esa jkT; us viuh ehfM;k o lkL= cyksa lfgr ftruh T;knk
kfDr dks dsfUnzr fd;k gS] 1947 ds ckn vkt rd ds lewps bfrgkl esa
oSlk dHkh ugha gqvkA ;kuh ;g ekewyh neu&vfHk;ku ugha gS cfYd gekjs
f[kykQ o kfUrdkjh tuleqnk; ds f[kykQ jkT; }kjk NsM+k x;k
lpeqp dk ,d ;q) gSA vius geykoj rsoj] [kqfQ;k foHkkxksa] lkL=
cyksa dh rSukrh] ok;qlsuk ds iz;ksx] bu lcds chp dks&vkfMZusku]
Iykfuax] dek.M vkfn lHkh phtksa esa ;g vfHk;ku vius vki esa vHkwriwoZ
gS vkSj Hkkjrh; turk vkt ,d pje izfrf;koknh ;q) dk lkeuk dj
jgh gSA

lPpkbZ dk nwljk igyw ;g gS fd vkt Hkkjr dk kfUrdkjh

dE;qfuLV vkUnksyu ftl eqdke ij tk igqapk gS] og Hkh vius&vki
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
292 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

vHkwriwoZ gSA gekjs nsk ds dE;qfuLV vkUnksyu ds 85 lky ds bfrgkl esa

,slk nskO;kih mHkkj dHkh ugha fn[kkA pkj nkdksa ds dE;qfuLV
kfUrdkjh la?k"kksa o oxZ;q) ds vuqHkoksa ls ySl rFkk ekysek dks
l`tukRed :i ls ykxw djus esa leFkZ ,d vf[ky Hkkjrh; Lo:i okyh
kfUrdkjh dE;qfuLV ikVhZ] turk ds Lusg o lf; leFkZu o Hkkxhnkjh
ij vk/kkfjr cM+s Qkjeskuksa rFkk mUur gfFk;kjksa o ;q)dyk ls ySl ,d
etcwr ih,yth, vkSj ntZuksa jkT;ksa esa QSyh tkx:d laxfBr o lkL=
turk] ,d foLrkfjr gksrs tkus okyk fokky o O;kid vkUnksyu] dbZ
xqfjYyk tksu] ogka iuirh] lqn`<+ gksrh o fodflr gksrh turk dh
kfUrdkjh jktuhfrd lRrk] nskO;kih xgu o fokky jktuhfrd
izHkko&;s lc vius dbZ nkdksa ds la?k"kksZa ds nkSjku feyh gekjh vHkwriwoZ
miyfC/k;ka gSaA

gekjh ikVhZ] mlds usr`Ro esa tkjh vkUnksyu vkSj oxZ&kks"k.k]

tqYe o vR;kpkj ij vk/kkfjr lM+h&xyh jktuhfrd O;oLFkk dkss m[kkM+
Qsaddj turk dh ,d u;h tuoknh jktuhfrd O;oLFkk ds Hkzw.k dk
fodkl o foLrkj us kkld oxksZa dks iwjh rjg vkrafdr dj Mkyk gSA
muds }kjk gekjs f[kykQ pyk;k tk jgk ;g izfrkfUrdkjh ;q) muds
blh vkrad o cngoklh dk izrhd gS] mudh detksjh dk izrhd gSA

ge tkurs gSa fd gekjh nsk dh kfUr nh?kZdkyhu yksd;q) ds

jkLrs vkxs c<+ jgh gSA nh?kZdkyhu yksd;q) dk Lo:i gh ,slk gksrk gS
fd nqeu ge ij ckj&ckj ?ksjk Mkyks] foukk djks dh eqfge pykrk gS
vkSj ge ml eqfge ijkLr djrs gq,] viuh vkRexr rkdrksa dk laj{k.k
vkSj mudh o`f) o fodkl djrs gq, vkxs c<+rs tkrs gSaA ;kuh ?
ksjko&neu eqfgeksa dk pyk;k tkuk vkSj bUgsa ijkLr djrs gq, vkxs c<+rs
tkuk nh?kZdkyhu yksd;q) dk Bksl Lo:i ;gh gksrk gSA gj ?ksjko&neu
dks lQyrkiwoZd ijkLr djus ds tfj, gh yksd;q) u;s pj.k esa Nykax
yxkdj mUur gksrk gSA ;gka Hkh fuLlansg vHkh ds bl ?ksjko&neu
vfHk;ku dks
lQyrkiwoZd ijkLr djus ds tfj, gekjh ikVhZ] ih,yth, vkSj blds
usr`Ro esa pyk;k tk jgk yksd;q) Hkh Nykax yxkdj ubZ eafty esa
mUur gksxkA
bl geys ds Lo:i] dkj.kksa vkSj gekjs vke o Bksl dk;ZHkkjksa ds
ckjs esa gekjh dsUnzh; desVh us dbZ ekxZnkZu fn;s gSaA fQj tulaxBu o
la;qDr ekspkZ laxBuksa esa dk;Zjr lkfFk;ksa ds fy, lsUVy lqdkseks us Hkh
ysVj vkfn tkjh fd;k gSA mUgha dh jkskuh esa gesa vius C;wjks] jkT;ksa o
vU;kU; dk;Z{ks=ksa dh Bksl ifjfLFkfr;ksa dks ns[krs gq, bl ccZj o
pkSrjQk geys dks ijkLr djus gsrq vke o Bksl rFkk nh?kZdkfyd o
QkSjh dk;ZHkkj r; djus gksaxs] mUgsa iwjk djus ds fy, Bksl rkSj&rjhds
viukus gksaxs rFkk ;kstuk,a cukuh gksaxhA
lewps nsk esa gh tkjh vkSj [kkldj gekjs dsUnzh; {ks=ksa esa dsfUnzr
bl ccZj o pgqaeq[kh izfrf;koknh geys ds en~nsutj gekjh ,uvkjch
ds lHkh jkT;ksa ds tulaxBuksa o la;qDr ekspkZ laxBuksa esa dk;Zjr lkfFk;ksa
ds lkeus eq[;&eq[; dk;ZHkkj fuEu :i esa lkeus vkrs gSa &
1- bl geys ds f[kykQ O;kid turk dks] fofHkUu tuoknh o
izxfrkhy] nskHkDr] U;k;ilan fofHkUu laxBuksa] xzqiksa o O;fDr;ksa dks
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
293 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

xksycan djuk( lHkh Lrjksa ij fofHkUu fdLe ds neu fojks/kh

LFkk;h&vLFkk;h eapksa o la;qDr Qksjeksa ds tfj, O;kidre kfDr;ksa dks
lkFk ysdj neu&fojks/kh dkjZokb;ksa dks ,d lgh rkyesy ds lkFk vkxs
c<+kukA
2- bl geys ds ,d izeq[k Hkkx ds :i esa k=q us gekjs f[kykQ ,d
tcnZLr nq"izpkj o dqRlk vfHk;ku pyk j[kk gSA bl e esa mlus
ehfM;k ds ,d cgqr cM+s fgLls dks gekjs f[kykQ >ksad fn;k gSA gesa
viuh iwjh rkdr ls bl nq"izpkj o dqRlk vfHk;ku dk HkaMkQksM+ djuk
pkfg,A bl e esa flQZ gesa vius ehfM;k&ra= ij gh ugha fuHkZj jguk
pkfg, cfYd izpfyr ehfM;k dk Hkh ;FkklaHko Hkjiwj mi;ksx djuk
pkfg,A lkFk gh vU;kU; lHkh fe= kfDr;ksa o ldkjkRed kfDr;ksa ds
lkFk feydj ,d csgrj rkyesy ds lkFk vius tokch izpkj&vfHk;ku
dks yxkrkj pykrs jgus dh t:jr gSA bls gj oDr o fujarj fd;s
tkus okys ,d loZdkfyd dke ds :i esa ysuk gksxkA
3- gekjs izpkj esa bl izfrf;koknh geys ds eq[; dkj.k ds :i esa
lkezkT;okn ,oa nyky&ukSdjkkg&iwathifr oxZ }kjk ou&lEink o
[kfut&lEink ds nksgu dk loky eq[; :i ls lkeus mNyk gSA
Hkkjrh; kkld oxZ ywVuk pkgrs gSa vxk/k ou&[kfut&ty lEink dksA
ekvksoknh blesa ck/kk gSaA blhfy, muds lQk;s dh ;g ;kstuk yh xbZ
gS] ;g izpkj eq[; cuk gSA gekjs izpkj esa Hkh ;gh igyw egRo ik jgk
gSA blds vykok nwljk lokZf/kd egRoiw.kZ igyw] ;kuh gekjk vkUnksyu
bl kks"k.k] xSjcjkcjh] vU;k; o tqYe dh bl jktuhfrd O;oLFkk ds
f[kykQ ,d lgh tuoknh O;oLFkk dk u;k fodYi Hkkjrh; turk ds
le{k isk dj jgk gS] vkSj bl oSdfYid ekMy turkuk ljdkj ds
mn~Hko] fodkl o lqn`<+hdj.k us mUgsa bruk cngokl cuk fn;k gS] ;g
de egRo ik jgk gSA gesa vius izpkj esa lkezkT;okn vkSj muds nyky
oxksZa dh bl lM+s&xys ekStwnk tufojks/kh fodYi ds cjDl kfUrdkjh
fodYi] muds izfrf;koknh fodkl ds cjDl turk ds okLrfod
fodkl ds ekMy dks] tks fd turkuk ljdkjsa dj jgh gSa] etcwrh ls
lkeus ykuk gksxkA bl ckr dks etcwrh ls j[kuk gksxk dh ekStwnk
izfrfd;koknh jktuhfrd O;oLFkk esa dksbZ okLrfod tui{kh; fodkl gks
gh ugha ldrk vkSj blds fy, bl O;oLFkk dks m[kkM+ Qsaddj turk
dh tuoknh jktuhfrd O;oLFkk dh LFkkiuk t:jh gSA
4- ;g neu&vfHk;ku cM+h la[;k esa fofHkUu rcdksa o kfDr;ksa dks
gekjh vksj /kdsy jgk gSA jktlRrk ds ccZj o c<+rs QkWlhoknh :[k ds
pyrs fofHkUu fdLe dh kfDr;ka vkSj Hkh T;knk blds f[kykQ mHkj jgh
gSaA gesa bl QkWlhoknh] lqn`<+ gksrs iqfyfl;k jkT; ds f[kykQ mHkj jgh
fofHkUu kfDr;ksa dks vius i{k esa thr ysus okyh uhfr;ka ysuh gksaxhA
;kstukc) :i ls mUgsa fofHkUu LFkk;h&vLFkk;h ekspksZa o la;qDr
xfrfof/k;ksa esa kkfey djuk gksxk] mUgsa lkFk ysdj yEcs le; rd pyus
yk;d t:jh /kS;Z o yphysiu dk iznkZu djuk gksxkA bl ekeys esa
gekjh vke uhfr gksxh&lHkh jSfMdy rkdrksa dks ,dtwV djks] chp dh
e/;orhZ kfDr;ksa ds lkFk ,drkc) gks tkvks vkSj eqV~BhHkj dV~Vjrkoknh
kfDr;ksa dks vyxko esa Mky nks !
5- bl e esa gesa k=q [kses ij Hkh iwjh rjg fuxkg j[kuh gksxh vkSj
muds chp ds NksVs ls NksVs vUrjfojks/k dk Hkh bLrseky djuk gksxkA
bl ekeys esa ladh.kZrkoknh vkSj dBeqYykoknh utfj;k gekjs fy, ?kkrd
lkfcr gksxkA
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
294 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

6- bal neu&vfHk;ku dks ijkLr djus dk loky eq[;r% bal ckr

ij fuHkZj djrk gS fd ge u;s&u;s ;q) ds ekspsZ fdrus de le; esa
fdruh T;knk la[;k esa [kksy ikrs gSaA ;kuh d`f"k kfUrdkjh Nkikekj
;q) dks u;s&u;s {ks=ksa esa fufeZr o fodflr djuk loZizeq[k dk;ZHkkj gSA
blds fy, gesa pqfuUnk {ks=ksa esa de ls de le; esa rS;kfj;ksa dks iwjk
djuk gksxkA gekjs tulaxBuksa o la;qDr ekspkZ laxBuksa esa dk;Zjr
dkejsM LFkkuh; ikVhZ&laxBuksa ls lgh o fu;fer rkyesy fodflr
djrs gq, fdrus de&ls&de le; esa mDr {ks=ksa esa mijksDr rS;kfj;ksa
dks iwjk djus esa tulaxBuksa o tuvkanksyuksa dks ;Fkksfpr Hkwfedk esa
mrkj ikrs gSa] ;g igyw vR;Ur egRoiw.kZ Hkwfedk fuHkk;sxkA ;kuh lHkh
{ks=ksa esa ikVhZ] ih,yth,] kfUrdkjh tuvkUnksyu o kfUrdkjh lqxfBr
tuk/kkj cukus o fodflr djus ij ,d le;c) o ;kstukc) <ax ls
[kqn dks vkSj viuh kfDr;ksa dks dsfUnzr djuk vHkh vkids izeq[k
dk;ZHkkjksa esa ls ,d gSA bal ekeys esa lHkh usr`Rodkjh dkejsMksa dks ,d
{ks= pqudj ogka ekMy fodflr djus dk VkjxsV ysuk pkfg,A
7- gekjs C;wjks ds dk;Z{ks= dk vf/kdkak fgLlk eSnkuh {ks= gS] tgka
djksM+ksa&djksM+ fdlku clrs gSaA ;kuh nh?kZdkyhu yksd;q) dks ckj&ckj
ds neu&vfHk;kuksa dk eqdkcyk djrs gq, vkxs c<+krs tkus ds vxk/k
tulzksr o vU;kU; lzksrksa ls ;g {ks= dkQh le`) gSA vr% vHkh ls gekjs
dsUnzh; bykdksa ds la?k"kksZa dks vkxs c<+kus ds fy, t:jh gj fdLe dh
enn nsus o t:jrksa dh vkiwfrZ djus dk cM+k dk;ZHkkj gekjs dk;Z{ks=ksa
ij gSA bl e esa tulaxBuksa o ekspkZ laxBuksa dh] muesa dk;Zjr
dkejsMksa dh] lalk/kuksa dk fodkl djus vkSj mUgsa ;Fkksfpr {ks=ksa esa
vkiwfrZ djus esa cM+h Hkwfedk gSA mlds fy, gj {ks= o ekspsZ ij mijh
dkejsM mijh t:jrksa dks j[ksa rFkk uhps ds laxBu rn~uqlkj Bksl
;kstuk cukosa!
8- lkezkT;okn vkSj muds nyky oxksZa ds vkt ds nkSj ds geyksa dk
;g {ks= dkQh fkdkj gSA foLFkkiu] jkstxkj dk foukk] lalk/kuksa dh ywV
;gka cM+s iSekus ij gks jgh gS rFkk ;g vkSj Hkh c<+sxhA lkFk gh lkearh
neu mRihM+u rks pje ij gS ghA fQj vkt ds bal neu ds f[kykQ Hkh
;gka ,d ekgkSy cuk gSA bu lHkh phtksa ds en~nsutj gekjs dk;Z{ks=ksa
esa ,d&,d {ks= pqudj ogka dkejsM [kqn dks dsfUnzr djsaA ykyx<+ ds
ekWMy ls lh[krs gq, gesa bu eSnkuh {ks=ksa esa kfUrdkjh tumHkkjksa o
kfUrdkjh tukvkUnksyuksa ds u;s&u;s fcUnqvksa dks czsd djuk gksxkA bal
pkSrjQk geys dks ijkLr djus esa ;s u;s&u;s la?k"kZ ds fcUnq cM+h Hkwfedk
fuHkk;saxsA
9- neu dh gj ?kVuk dks bl vke.k ls tksM+rs gq, gesa gj {ks=
esa u;h&u;h igy ysuh gksxhA T;knk&ls&T;knk jktuhfrd gLr{ksi
djus gksaxsA
10- mijksDr dk;ZHkkjksa dks iwjk djus dk lkjk nkjksenkj bal ckr ij
fuHkZj djrk gS fd ge tulaxBuksa o la;qDr ekspkZ laxBuksa esa lHkh Lrjksa
ij dk;Zjr usr`Ro o drkj dh oSpkfjd] jktuhfrd] lkaxBfud o
vU;kU; O;kogkfjd ;ksX;rkvksa dk fdruk fodkl dj ikrs gSaA gekjs fy,
;g QkSjh rkSj ij t:jh gS fd ge mudh desfV;ksa dks lHkh {ks=ksa esa
vkRefuHkZj] leFkZ o lf; cuk;sa] mudh QaDkfuax dks fu;fer o lqpk:
cuk ik;saA vr% lHkh Lrj ds ikVhZ o tulaxBuksa ds usr`Rodkjh dkejsMksa
dks bal dke dks] ;kuh viuh drkj dh jktuhfrd&O;ogkfjd
fk{k.k&izfk{k.k ds dk;Z dks lokZf/kd egRoiw.kZ dk;Z ds :i esa ysuk
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
295 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

gksXkkA blds fy, lHkh Lrjksa ij lgh i)fr ysuh gksxh rFkk Bksl
;kstuk,a cukuh gkasxhA

dkejsMksa] vkt ftruk tcjnLr vke.k gekjs f[kykQ tkjh gS] mruk
gh og T;knk izfroknh o izfrjks/kh rkdrksa dks lkeus ykrk tk jgk gS
vkSj yk;sxkA dk- ekvks us dgk gS fd ftruk gh T;knk neu&mRihM+u]
mruk gh tcjnLr izfrjks/kA
vkb,] ge lHkh izfroknh o izfrjks/k dh rkdrksa dks xksycan dj kkld
oxZ ds bl ccZj o pkSrjQk vke.k dks ijkLr djsa vkSj lewps nsk esa
kfUrdkjh vkUnksyu dks u;h apkb;ksa rd fodflr djsa!

kfUrdkjh vfHkoknu ds lkFk

,u-vkj-ch-

(3) Art.A19ofExh.266istitledas

Oppose the Government's ongoing war against the people

of Garhchiroli district !
Condemn the brutal attacks on people, mass leaders and
people's warriors.
Propose the happening massacres in the name of
encounters and take initiative to put forth the
Government's cruelty before society !

Dear friends red salute !

Indian revolutionary movement has come to a

juncture where the ruling classes considering it as a biggest
threat for then. It does mean that it, with its all strength will
try to suppress the revolutionary movement, it does also mean
that the Maoists revolutionary line has been proved. It has
really become a challenge for class enemies. Though the
people's war, till date has been brought up to this juncture, if it
has to take towards victory, and to make people free from the
clutches of imperialism, comprador capitalism, and feudalism
then all the people's movements and its supporters, those who
uphold people's side should fight coherently with co-
ordination co-operation and united. The government's
policies till date, a crisis ridden capitalist system never before
has huge impact over the lives of people. Due to this huge
unrest among people is clearly visible. Consequently, people's
movements in various forms all over India are emerging. Our
Maharashtra is not far from this.

Whether it is movement under Maoist leadership or

under any other leadership, the government has begun its
repression all over in the name of operation green hunt the all
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
296 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

out repression since 2009. This repression has a single aspect

i.e. suppressing the mass movement weather urban or rural.
The government has got a single policy i.e. cruelly
suppressing the voice of the people. This repression
campaign of the government has been called war on people by
the intellectuals.

We politically analyze this onslaught in two points.

1. On political scenario CPI (Maoist) has been emerged as
a major struggling and a strong people's power. It has a clear,
reconcilable strategy and tactics which has a leading
capability and evolved encountering so many reverses in the
last 44 years. It has people's liberation guerilla army to carry
on political work on behalf of people. The Jantana Sarkar the
embryonic from of people's power (jansatta) has been
established in guerilla zones. The end of political power of
the comprador bureaucratic capitalists and feudal classes is
inevitable if the people's unrest and mass struggles have been
turned into revolutionary struggles.

2. The areas where the mass movements under the

leadership of CPI (maoist) is strong, is the richest part of the
country in terms of minerals and natural wealth. The Indian
ruling classes have sold out this invaluable wealth to the
imperialists at the throw out prices in order to come out of
economic crisis. In this regard hundreds of MOU's were
signed but due to Maoists this loot if happened to be
impossible.

The governments attacks are continue on the

peoples of Garhchiroli district. People, various organizations
of the people (particularly DAKMS, AKMS, BAL
SANGHTANA, KAMS and jantana sarkar etc.) and people's
army PLGA are united resisting this onslaught. When so
much fierce battle in rural India has been taking place,
martyrs blood is flowing for the freedom of people the
vigilant and conscious class from various parts of the
country are seem either obscurest or waging struggles in an
individual and limited manner. So that we, the CPI(MAOIST)
makes an appeal to the friends, people of the exploited
classes, intellectuals, journalists who upholds and stands for
people's cause, workers, worker's leaders, students, people
fighting against displacement, for justice, rights and who
honestly works for society, cultural activists-artists, literary
writers, balladeers, those who fight for women's rights and to
comrades to come forward for help and for co-operation in the
mahasangram (fierce battle) of the Indian revolutionary
movement.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
297 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Around 30 IPS officers have been deployed in

Garhchiroli district to perpetrate the attacks on people.
Along with district police thousands of commando forces
were made in the name of C-60, in which local youths are
recruited and thus the government started murdering adivasi
by arming adivasis. SRPF has also been deployed, so as
CRPF. 5 battalions of para-military forces with commando
training are also deployed. If we see, regarding balance of
forces in the battle, on the one hand there is more than around
10,000 police equipped with disastrous (mass destructive)
mortar bombs, armed with LMG, AK-47, SLR, INSAS,
Bulletproof jackets, mine proof vehicles, helicopters and
unmanned aeronautic vehicles (UAV) and on the other hand
there is PLGA with limited rifles and people armed with old
traditional axe and barmar gun.

With these more than 10,000 police force,

helicopters and unaccounted expenses (free from audit) with
crore's of rupees the states minister for home R.R. Patil
commanding these attacks in a brazen manner. He openly
stated that goli ka jawab goli se dhenge which is itself
unconstitutional.
The forms of attacks which are being perpetrated are as
follows.
1. Infiltrating the forces in the jungle and encircling it on a
large scale. Prohibiting people from entering in jungle,
threatening to kill.
2. Carrying out massacres by creating fake encounters. The
government has had announced prize on each dead body
so that with each dead body in your list you earn more
(more dead bodies, more you earn) promotion is also in
waiting . So that to score more, they by labeling anyone
as a naxalite they kill anybody. Recently same had
happened on April 4, 2013 in batpar village.
3. Spreading terror among people by showing the posters of
dead bodies, maliciously propagating the issue like
violence, women, manufactured propaganda against
leadership and false propaganda over money and tax
collection.
4. Beating people sometime beating until death, cold blooded
murder.
5. Raping women, molestation of women.
6. Prohibiting from cutting paddy crops and destroying them.
7. Forcibly taking away the food grains and paddy crops and
arson them.
8. Encircling and surrounding the villages disallowing people
to go out to attend natures call.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
298 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

9. Forcibly sleeping in the houses of villages and creating

terror in their personal life, forcibly eating the cooked
food.
10. Destroying the collective decision making process of the
adivasi villages. Some people are being turned into
people's betrayers and informers by police by abetting
greediness or by giving threats or by trapping them.
11. Throwing in the jail by instigating false cases, if one goes
to help then he also has to go though similar treatment,
threatening, abusing and insulting him so much so that one
would never dare to help again.
12. Camping in school and hostels, beating up students
purring hurdles in their studies by spreading terror among
them.
13. Forcibly involving students in police melavas
(programmes) and in so called peace rallies.
14. Distributing television sets, DVDs, film CDs for spreading
consumer and commercialized culture by destroying
adivasi culture.
15. Emotionally blackmailing, threatening corrupting and
harassing by denying basic facilities and even necessary
certificates and documents to the families of the cadres
active, recruited in the paddy and forcibly asking them to
surrender their children.

Some instances.

1. Date April 4, 2013. Time 8 a.m. 5 Maoists were killed

at the shores of river Indravati near batpar village. Police had
recovered 5 barmaar gun.

This is a fake encounter. A local activist laxman and

ammi along with some villagers were supposed to cross the
river by donga (a small boat.) At the same time police
surrounded and caught them and killed them. This is a cold
blooded murder. No casualties at police side. Barmaar gun
and axe are old traditional and daily means of earning food
and wage. One could clearly see that the villagers were sitting
on the boat. Nevertheless, the police fired at them. Just for
increasing the score of the dead bodies to complete the target
given by home minister. Just for that five people were killed.

Sunita's brother one of the victim, in the incident of the

batpar village had told media that his sister had nothing to do
with Maoist organization. He has claimed for dead body.
Among the killed are. 1. Laxman 2. Ammi 3. Prakash Pallo of
Kondegaon. 4. Sudhakar Usali of Pengunda, and sunita of
Batpar village.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
299 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

2. Date 20 January 2013. Govindgaon, time 1.30 a.m. 6

Maoists were killed. Among them are 1. Shankar Lakda a
member of divisional committee. 2. Mohan Kowase Acm. 3.
Vinod Kodape Acm. 4. Geeta Usendi platoon deputy
commander 5. Juru Mattami 6. Raju Gavde.

These comrades completed the village sabha (public

meeting) and fininshed their dinner and were having
discussion near in the light of lamp post. Police equipped
with sophisticated weapons surrounded them covering three
sides to ambush them. Police fired indiscriminately killing 6.

This is also can't be called an encounter. This is a

murder because instead of killing, police could easily arrest
them. But just for scoring number of targets in the minister's
darbaar they killed them.

3. 12 April 2013. Near about 1 k.m. From village

Sindesur. Police Encircled and indiscriminately fired on a jan
sabha (public meeting) killing 6 people. Among the killed ,
there were young boys namely sukhdev varlu gawade and
kalidas duru hidko from village Sindesur. Comrade Kailash a
member of Tipragrh area committee was killed when he came
down to save the people. Since 1993 he had been active in the
party and had been to jail for almost 5 & half years. After he
was released from jail, he joined the party with more
determination and took the responsibility of spreading
revolutionary movement in Dhanora area. In this incident
police would have killed more villagers if Kailash wouldn't
have taken initiative to retaliate. At that time 3 women also
got martyred. They were all teenagers and unarmed and were
engaged in propagating the revolutionary thoughts among.
People by distributing phamplets and singing songs. They
were also killed by police. Here also, it is clear that the police
wanted to complete their target of counting dead to get praised
in government darbaar.

4. Date 20 March Ambezari, taluka Dhanora, 2 bambu

cutting labours were beaten up by C-60 police till they lost
consciousness. At last people took them to hospital and
saved their lives. They belonged to Mandla and Balaghat
district of Madhya Pradesh. Every year hundreds of labour
comes from these districts. It is a crime to carry java (a
traditional drink made of wheat flour and nachni) in tiffin
dabbas. The police could then and by assuming that the java
was being taken for naxlities they were beaten up mercilessly.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
300 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

5. Tansing a villager from navezari, taluka Korchi, A

police agent tied a bag to the back stand of his motor cycle not
known to him. All of a sudden police trapped him he was
beaten and thrown into prison. This was done because he was
an active cadre of Kisan sangarsh samiti of Korchi.

6. Cri. 21 January 2013, the local peasant organization of

Korchi called Kisan sangarsh samiti brought out a rally
mobilizing more than 10,000 people. The leaders of this rally
were issued threatening notices by police. Last year also
Shivdas from village Gangin taluka Korchi an adivasi (tribal)
leader of the rally was arrested and tied to a tree and was
beaten and was sent to jail. Similarly, ratiram from village
nadekal, Korchi an activist of same organization was arrested
and thrown into jail.

7. The people of village nadekal were encircled and

beaten up mercilessly.

8. Gangaram Kallo, village navezari, taluka Korchi. A

famous and popular leader of adivasi people and Kisan
sangarsh samiti was arrested and detained in police custody
for whole night. By seeing the intensifying resistance of the
people he was released immediately. But now police has
begun harassing him and his family members. Day and night
police surrounds his house and without a legal notice searches
his house.

9. Village murkudi, taluka korchi, the adivasi cultivated

the land collectively and with their collective farming grown
paddy crops but C-60 police forbade them from cutting the
paddy crop. when the reason was asked by the villagers they
were beaten up relentlessly,

10. 32 bags of dhan (paddy) of the villagers were seized by

plice in lekurbodi village korchi.

11. Molestation and beating up women in village

katengetola.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
301 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

12. Kanneli, taluka dhanora, in july, 2 people were beaten

up and arsoned the grain.

13. Kasansur area, taluka etapally. Within one year 105

people were beaten up by police.

14. The students of korchi ashram school when refused to

participate in the police melawa (campaign) they were
beaten up by police.

15. Village nainguda, taluka etapally, 30 September, 5

people were beaten up, oct 3, village gudaram of etapally, 9
villagers were beaten up. 11 oct. a person from village kohaka
was beaten up until he fell unconciouss. Oct. 3, village koti 6
people were beaten up.

16. 7 november, village karka, taluka etapally 2 people

were beaten up. Nov. 1, village manewara of etapally 10
villagers were beaten up and for of them were taken to camp
including some girls and were beaten up and thrown into jail.

17. Village gaderi, taluka etapally, 10 people were beaten

up until they fell unconcious.

18. Village gaddapally, taluka etapally, 15 people were

beaten up while being taken to camp. women resisted this so
that they were released.

19. In the adjoining chattisgarh, on border in the village

sadethriyanshi 10 people were beaten up. To add, there are lot
of such incidents. In all the terror of police and para-military
forces exists in Garhchiroli district. Civic action programme,
navjivan abhiyan and janjagran melava is nothing but a
propaganda stunt to misguide and to present rosy picture
before civil society. Through this they try to humanize the
cruelty of the Government's violence so that it is necessary to
expose them. Cruel police repression is being perpetrated in
Garhchiroli. Justice loving and democracy loving friends, the
on going revolutionary movement under the leadership of CPI
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
302 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(Maoist) belongs to all of us. Mass movement and armed

struggle both are equally important and are necessary for
the revolution.

We Kindly appeal you.

1. To come forward for a fact finding of the encounter of

govindgaon, batpar and sindesur and to bring out the truth
before people.

2. Para-Military forces and commando forces should stop

spreading terror among people, encircling villages, saturating
people for whole day, forcibly sleeping in the houses of the
people day out day in and should stop destroying food grain.

3. Immediately release the people imprisoned fabricating

the false cases. As well as the status of political prisoners
must be given to them who are linked or was associated with
Maoist movement.

4. Compensation must be given to the people for the

destruction & loot of their property & belonging.

5. Stop the repression campaign on the people namely

'Operation green hunt'
Raise your voice for above demands.

Secretary

Sahyadri
State committee of maharashtra
CPI (Maoist)

430] FromtheabovedocumentatArts.A19of
Exh.266itrevealsthattheaccusedno.3HemMishra
isthememberofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)
and its frontal organisation RDF and lastly appeal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
303 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

was made for revolutionary movement and mass

movementbyarmedstruggle.

(4) AprintoutatArt.A20ofExh.266addressedto
ComradeGeneralSecretary,TheCPI(Maoist)
writtenbyMaheshisasunder:

To
ComradeGeneralSecretary,
TheCPI(Maoist)

Subject:Abouttheantiunityactivitiesofthosewho
arerunningthepartyinUttarakhand.

DearComrade

Ilearnt,afewdaysafterIwasreleased,thatIhave
been expelled from the party. This expulsion has
comecloseontheheelsoftheexpulsion,reportedto
me following my release, of one woman comrade,
andexpulsion/suspensionofanothermalecomrade.
All three of us were released on bail from jail at
different times. We three may have different
specificties,butwewereallmembersoftheZonal
Committee responsible for this state. The woman
comrade expelled when I was still in jail also
happenstomemylifepartner.Withourexpulsion,
thosewhoarerunningtheshowhave,incidentally,
got rid of all the remainining leadership (zonal)
comradeswhojoinedourbelovedunitedpartyfrom
oneandthesameorganisationalstream,whateverit
may,incidentally,be.Someofushavethepotential
and have in the past actually contributed to some
importantCentraltasks,andholdtheunificationof
the two streams as the bestthing that could have
happened. In Uttarakhand, however, the unity has
been, and still seems to retain a strong negative
aspect.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
304 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Thetwoothercomradesmayormaynotappealto
thenexthighestcommittee,which,asIgatherinthe
present extraordinary situation, could be the very
highestcommittee,theCentralCommitteeitself.Due
totechnicalreasons,Iamsendingthisletteralone,
rightaway,andthenonlyshallIbeabletotellthem
thatIhavedoneso.Itispossiblethattheymaynot
choose to (out of asenseofreaction)or maybe
unable to communicate their appeals to your
committeeduetotechnicaldifficulties,suchastoo
early a date for the last possible linkup, and my
largegeographicaldistancefromthematthisprecise
moment.

Ihavenotmetanymemberoftheleadingcommittee
forUkhnd,ortheiremissaryyet,butwithsomepart
timecomradesintheopen,Isawandreadaleaflet
issued by the Uttarakhand Seemant Committee on
the occasion of the formation day of our party, ie
21st September 2011. It is a verbose pamphlet in
Hindi, explaining the present situation to party
cadres and supporters. The main problem with it,
however, is that, at the end,there isaconcluding
paragraph devoted exclusively to what they have
called the expulsion of some comrades from the
party.Iwastoldthatthecomradeswhohavebeen
expelledaremyselfandmylifepartner.Onfurther
enquiry,Iwastoldthattheothermalecomradewas
notexpelled(asIhadbeentoldbyhimwithinhours
ofmyreleasefromjail),butsuspended,ostensibly
for3months.

Idon'thaveacopyoftheleaflet,butshalltrytosend
acopyatthenextdateofcontact.Itwasgiventoa
leaderofamassorganisationtobesenttotheCC.In
averyvagueandjumbleduplanguage,theyseemed
tohavepointedout3mainreasonsfortheexpulsion
("of some comrades"). One, they said, was our
divertingthepracticeofthepartysincetheunityin
200405,awayfromthelineoftheparty.Thesecond
wastohaverevealedpartysecrets.Thethirdwasto
havesurrenderedtothestate.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
305 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Letme,firstandforemost,statethattheothertwo
comrades,againstwhomactionwastaken,hadnot
committed any of the abovementioned
mistakes/crimes. It is only I who have committed
one. And that is "revealing party secrets" to the
enemy.ThishappenedwhenIbrokeundertorture,
aftertryingtoresistfor3daysand3nights.Forthis
I have already selfcriticized, when in jail itself,
throughalettersentout,andthiswaswellreported
acrosstheranks,Iamtold.EvenwhenIbrokedown
under torture, I successfuly guarded the major
secrets,especiallytheonesrelatedtomyinvolvment
in activities at the party center, which they were
trying to rake out, and some of which they
apparentlyknewbeforeaccostingme.Thisweakness
onmypartwasalsoafalloutoftheweakeningofmy
communistspirit,whichwascausedingreatpartby
theconspiraciesofthesesameleadershipcomrades
whonowpurporttohaveexpelledme.

Thereisnoquestionofmyoranyoneknowntome
havingsurrenderedtotheenemy.

Moreover,thepracticeaftertheunity,asadvocated
by me,orbyanyofthetwoothercomrades,was
neveropposedtothepartyline.Infact,itisIwho
playedtheleadingroleinsynthesizingthepraticeof
thetwostreams,whichupholdedoneandthesame
ideologicalpoliticalline.Thiswassomethingwhich
thehighercommitteeortheconcernedCCMsshould
have done. The draft of the review report for the
Zonal Conference of Uttarakhand in mid2006,
which includes our united perspective for the
practice in the state, was indeed prepared by me,
approved after minor amendments by the higher
committee andthe concernedCCMs, includingthe
then NRB Sec and then by the Zonal Conference.
Evenasadelegateforthe3USACconferenceinlate
2006,thoughIwasnotaSACmember(Iremaineda
ZCmemberevenaftertheCongress),itwasmydraft
of the perspective portion,for Uttarakhand,of the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
306 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

3USACreviewreportfortheconferencewhichwas
approvedandpassed,virtuallywithoutamendment,
by the entire house. The 2 SAC members from
Uttarakhand(myseniors!)hadplayednoroleworth
mentioninginformulatingorcarryingoutthelineof
the party until the Congress. Since my humble
contributionhadpassedthroughtheprocessofthe
Congress,andwasapprovedintheprocess,inspite
of the successful manipulation and conspiracies of
these same comrades, so as to enable them to
representtheslimmajorityintermsofnumbers(as
is done in bourgeoisrevisionist parties, not in
genuine revolutionary parties like ours). Their
group,whichoperatedthroughoutasagroup,notas
aunitedparty,hademergedasamajorityalsodueto
the unfortunate machinationsofcertain CCMsand
SACMs, who were seeing to it that the then
Politbureau'sanalysisofsuchproblemsintherunup
totheCongress,andthePBguidelinestosetthings
rightwereignoredandnotactedupontooseriously.
Personally,IhadevensoughttimefromComKishan
daonthefringesofmytechnicalworkwiththePB
andCCinordertoseekhelp,atthethenadviceof
theGS,toresolvetheproblemsofUttrakhandwhich
originatedintheNRB.ThewelcomePBresolutionto
resolve various such problems, in fact, came after
that.
Just before my arrest, the same NRB Secretary as
before, had, instead of rooting out the problems,
splituptheUttarakhandZonalCommitteeintotwo,
andeffortswereafoottocornermeout,andrender
meineffective.Itwasinsuchanisolatedcondition
that,withnosolutioninsight,Igrewhopelessjust2
daysbeforeIwassuddenlypickedupbytheenemy,
inthecity.IknewallalongthatIwasbeingsought
by the enemy, and had always followed the UG
method,whichiswhyicouldsurviveforallofthe6
7yearssinceIbecameUGandwasbeingtargetted
allalong.Itisonlywhentheorganisationproblems
caused by the comrades leading us drove me to
hopelessnessthatIlostmyalertnessandwaspicked
upbytheenemywithinashortspanoftime.The
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
307 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

then Secretary of my Zonal Committee, also

representingthethenSACleadership(theonewho
represented Uttarakhand in the Congress), who I
believe must now be leading this "Seemant
Committee",wastheonewhohadactuallyaskedme
toresignandgetoutfromtheparty,justbeforemy
arrest.Hadhenotdoneso,Iwouldhavecontinued
toremainfirminthefaceoftheenemy's67year
long attempts to nab me. Nor would I have
succumbed under torture, and exposed the
membershipofmyZonalCommittee(thisisallthatI
revealed by way of party secrets; two of the
members who had just resigned got arrested
immediatelytherefater,athird,thewomancomrade,
continued to work UG, unfortunately got arrested
afteroveroneyear,duetoanerrorofjudgementofa
sympathizer contact, not due to surrender or
anything that these comrades, having cliquish
tendencies,mayallege).

Afterbeingjailed,Ihadthetimetoanalyzemyown
weaknesses, and am prepared to face any further
possibilityoftortureorwhatevertheenemymight
do, even to deal with the problems created by
cliquishcomradeswithinthenobleprecinctsofour
party.

Thesaiddecisiontoexpelmewastakensummarily,
withouttellingmewhatIwasaccusedof.Therewas
no question of their having given me a chance to
defend myself, or to explain anything. It was a
purelyunconstitutionalact.

Itismyhumblerequesttotheleadershiptoplease
investigate and, if found guilty, take stringent
disciplinaryactionasmaybenecessary,inorderto
prevent such comrades from working against the
interestofthepartyandtherevolution.Theyhave
repeatedly worked against the party interest.
RegardingworkinUttarakhand,withtheCCM,who
knew the problems of this area, having been
arrested, it is going to be difficult to solve these
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
308 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

organisational problems. Whatever may have been

thisCCMsothershortcomingsandmistakes,hewas
certainlyveryparticularaboutpreservingthespirit
of unity, at least until I was arrested, something
whichtheotherCCMsoftheNRBseriouslylacked.
Therefore this problem within the then NRB has
influenced the comrades down the line, and their
stance has hardened, following the arrest of
Comrade Srikant. This, I believe, have given these
"Seemant Committee" comrades the courage to
impatientlyandsummarilymalignmethroughtheir
spuriousannouncementofexpulsionofmeandmy
lifepartner.

She,whiledoingopenrevolutionarywork,asperthe
directionsofthethenCCMincharge,wasdeviously
expelledatthebehestoftheconcernedZCMandthe
Secy of the committee leading the work in
Uttarakhand, just when it was realized by these
manipulatorsthatIwaslikelytogetbail,following
the release of the doctor of Chhgrh. Then, even
beforeIcouldbeconsideredforreadmissionintothe
party after my release from jail, they resorted to
slander that I had surrendered to the enemy, etc.,
becauseofwhichtherewasnooptionbutto"expel"
me.

All this is a ploy to hoodwink our inexperienced

comrades,howeverfewmayhavenowremainedin
the state, but, fortunately for me, those mass
activistswhohadhelpedmejointhepartyaround
19992000, following a revolutionary life and
politicalstruggleagainstrevisionism,evenwithouta
revolutionaryparty,since1981,haveofferedtohelp
mecommunicatewiththeleadership,whomIhold
inhighregard.Thepartyhasmuchtodotoregain
its losses and improve its organisational and mass
practice(essentially,tactics),andIameverwillingto
continue giving my level best. Of course, I can
manageonmyownforthetimebeing,andamalso
tryingtohelpmyotherclosecomradestopreserve
thepartyspiritinthehopeofreunity/reorganisation.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
309 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Iamalsoquiteconfident,nowthatIhavehadthe
opportunitytofacetheordealofarrest,torture,and
solitary confinement for prolonged period,
uncertainties, and all that, that even with such
enormousCentrallossesIcanbepartoftheoverall
processofrebuilding,evenifIhavetodowithout
therightfulcollectiveatthecommitteelevel.

Letmealsomakeitknown,thatI,alongwiththe
othertwo,wouldprefertofightoutthislegalcase,
asitispoliticallynecessarytodoso,intheprevailing
circumstancesofUttarakhand.HenceImaynotbe
able to go UG completely, though I am willing to
performwhateverUGtasksImaybegivenfromtime
totime,asIhavedonesuccessivelyallmyyearsof
political life. Even in these challenging times, we
neednotbemechanicalaboutUGandOG.

I think I have already taken too much of your

attention.SoImustendhere.

Looking forward to a resolution, with communist

greetings,
yourscomradely
Mahesh

(5)Therecitalsoftheprintoutofletter(Art.A21)of
Exh.266addressedto ComradebyoneJadduand
Prakashdated1stAugust2013areasunder:

DearComrade,
RedSalutes!

Wehavesentlettersandreportsseveraltimes,but
we have not received any reply in the last eight
months. Especially after the arrest of the comrade
whowasguidingandcoordinatingwithus,wehave
notreceivedanyreply.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
310 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Thissituationhasmadeourorganisationandmany
activities around our organisation difficult to go
ahead. WithouttheguidanceoftheCCitismost
difficult for an all India organisation to take up
important steps, particularly our organisation is
playing a central role in coordinating many
activities.NowthatwehaveannouncedourallIndia
conference, it becomes even more difficult to take
many decisions without consulting you. Our
conferencehasbeenpostponedseveraltimesinthe
pastduetothearrestsandotherobstructions.Thisis
knowntoyou.

We had sent several times letters mentioning the

issues relating to international relations and the
problemsarosetherein.Wedontevenknowifyou
havereceivedtheseletters.Butwehavenotreceived
any reply so far from you. We had taken some
decisions due to the urgency. Forinstance, signing
the letters that were circulated. Now we have a
meeting to take decisions further. We have been
asking the international fraternal organisations to
waitandsuspendallworktillwegetguidancefrom
you.Butthiscannotgolikethisformoretime.

We have to decide about the new body of our

organisation.Wepleadwithyoutoarrangeaproper
channeltocommunicatewithusandcallatleasttwo
amongus,whoareyoungfromamongustohearall
thereportsandpendingissues. Thosetwopersons
are accused no.3 Hem Mishra and accused no.4
PrashantRahi.

Wehavereceived1.5lakhsonceand75thousandat
anothertimesofarafterthearrestofthecomrade.
But we incurred several lakhs of rupees on the
continuous programmes and activities. We have
incurredaloanof2.5lakhsasofnow.Everypassing
daybringsinnewexpenditure.Wedocollectfunds
buttherangeofouractivitiesissoveryhighthatwe
arenotinapositiontomeetallexpensesthrough
collections.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
311 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Weurgentlyneedfundsunderthefollowingheads:
Prisonercomradeshealthandotherlegalchargeson
cases(wearelookingafterhere):2laks.
Conference(apartfromwhatwecanbecollected):3
Lakhs.
Bookswearepublishingnow:2lakhs.
(Formorebookswecouldcollect1lakh)Butneed2
lakhsmoretopublishtheremainingbooks.
Loantobecleared:2.5lakhs.
Onearrestedseniorcomradeslifepartnerneedsat
least1lakhshere.
Forourteam(next6months)torunourselvesand
activitiesplannedweneed4lakhsatleast.
Therefore we need a minimum of 13 lakhs
immediately to meet various urgent needs and
activities.

Money apart, we need many of the important

decisions to be taken. We are in a position to
advanceonmanyfronts.Butbeforetakinganynew
step,weneedtodiscusswithyou.Werequestyouto
arrange to call these two comrades as soon as
possible.

Withrev.greetings.JadduandPrakash
1August2013.

431] On perusal of Art.A20 of Exh.266 it is clear that this

Maheshisaccusedno.4PrashantRahiashisnameisappearedinthe
chargesheetofUttarakhandCourtatExh.264whereinhisnameis
mentioned as Prashant Sanglikar @ Prashant Rahi @ Navin @
MaheshDa@Simas/oNarayanBabajiSanglikar. PoliceInspector
P.W.6 Atul Avhad admitted in his crossexamination that in Maoist
group every member has alias name and normally they use alias
name.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
312 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Documentscontaining247pagesofExh.267takenoutfromthe
electronicgadgetsi.e.Arts.1to41CDs,DVDs,pendrives,hard
disksseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabai

432] As discussed above the incriminating data contained in

textformatfoundintheelectronicgadgetsArts.1to41CDs,DVDs,
Pendrives,harddisksseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
Saibaba under seizure panchanama (Exh.165) can be read in
evidence.Theimportantincriminatingdocumentsarereproducedas
under:
433] ThedocumentatPageno.1ofExh.267istheSecretary's
report of first conference of theRevolutionary Democratic Front
(RDF) which was held on 2223 April at Hyderabad Telangana
addressedtoComradesandFriendsbyRedsalutetoalldelegatesin
whichitismentionedthatin2005twoorganizationsi.e.AllIndia
Peoples'ResistanceForum(AIPRF)andStrugglingForumforPeoples'
Resistance (SFPR) merged into Revolutionary Democratic Front
(RDF) whichwasdeclaredon23rdMay(NaxalbariDay)inaPress
ConferenceinDelhi.Thedetailsofthesaiddocumentarereproduced
asunder:
Rise!Resist! Liberate!

REVOLUTIONARYDEMOCRATICFRONT(RDF)
SecretarysReport(presentedinthe1st
ConferenceofRDF)

FirstConferenceoftheRevolutionaryDemocratic
Front(RDF)
2223April,SundaraiyaVigyanBhavan,Hyderabad,
Telangana
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
313 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ComradesandFriends,

Braving many difficulties, the first conference of

Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) is being
finallyheldontheseventhyearafteritsformation.
Onthisoccasion,itisworthrememberingComrade
KhagenDas,thefoundingPresidentofRDF,whohas
becomeamartyrduetooldageandaftersuffering
illhealth.Alongwithhim,wealsorememberyoung
Comrade Nagina Majhi, who was a member of
Krantikari Sanskritik Sangh, a constituent unit of
RDF,Bihar,wasalsomartyredasaresultofpolice
torture, custodial suffering andmedicalnegligence
by jail authorities. Red salute to all our martyr
comrades!
It must here be noted that three of our
comrades from RDF Central Committee, Comrade
RajaSarkhelandComradePrasunfromWestBengal
and Comrade Jiten Marandi from Jharkhand have
been falsely implicated under draconian laws and
arecurrentlyimprisonedbyvariousgovernmentsof
the reactionary Indian state. But in spite of their
incarceration,theyarerelentlesslyfightinginsidethe
prisonsagainsttheantipeoplepoliciesofthecentral
andstategovernmentsandforprisonersrights.We
salutethesebravecomradesofours.
We know that many of the comrades who have
gatheredheretoday,haverepeatedlyfacedthebrunt
of the fascist policiesof the government andhave
been falsely implicated, intimidated, arrested or
evenimprisoned.Againstmanyofusfalsecasesare
beingcontinuouslypursued.Butdespiteallthis,the
struggleforrealindependence,realdemocracyand
for dignity is intensifying with revolutionary
resolutenessandzeal.
Inthecurrentperiodofworldeconomiccrisisand
thepoliticalturmoil,thepoliticalandorganizational
responsibilities of RDF have become even more
important. In 2005, keeping in mind the existent
economic, political and social conditions and after
analyzing the material condition of the anti
imperialist antifeudal mass movements, the two
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
314 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

organizations All India Peoples Resistance Forum

(AIPRF) and Struggling Forum for Peoples
Resistance (SFPR) merged to form Revolutionary
DemocraticFront(RDF).Theformaldeclarationof
the formation of RDF took place on 23rd May,
NaxalbariDay,inapressconferenceinDelhi.There
itwasfirmlydeclaredthatRDFwillworktowards
theformationofanewdemocraticsocietyinIndia
andwillfightalongwiththevariousongoinganti
imperialist and antifeudal mass movements. RDF
will work towards liberating the people from the
clutchesoftheruthlessexploitationbytheforcesof
imperialism, feudalism and the comprador
bureaucraticbourgeoisie.RDFsupportstheongoing
valiant struggle for self determination and
nationhoodoftheoppressednationalitiesofKashmir
and the entire North East. RDF rejects the
parliamentary path and strives for intensifying
peoples struggles to overhaul the current semi
feudal semicolonial society and to build a new
democratic society free of all injustices. In the
context of these aims and objectives, a detailed
manifestoofRDFwasadopted.Onthebasisofthis,
thecentralandstatecommitteesofRDFhavebeen
functioningaspertheirorganizationalstrengthfor
thepastsevenyears.
In this First Conference ofRDF we needto assess
how much were we able to carry out our
responsibilities and implement the organisations
programmeinthegivensituationprevailinginthe
country.Wehavetocarefullyanalysehowsuccessful
wehavebeeninestablishingacollectiveleadership
and developing independent decisionmaking
betweenthecentralcommitteeandconstituentunits
atthestatelevel.Weneedtomakeconcreteanalysis
ofourpoliticalandorganizationalactivitiesinorder
tocorrectlyidentifyourstrengthsandweaknesses.
Wemustassessthelevelofoursuccessintakingour
politics to the broader masses, in understanding
theireverydayproblemsandinmobilizingpeopleby
building mass movements to solve them. We also
havetolearnfromexperiencesandboldlyraisethe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
315 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

leveloftheirrevolutionaryconsciousness.Wemust
face all these questions and objectively assess our
achievementsandfailures.Wehavetoidentifyour
practical weaknesses and strive more to overcome
themandtherebystrengthenourselves.Bydoingso,
wewillestablishourorganizationfirmlyamongthe
masses.

During thelast fewyearsofitsexistence,RDFhasundertaken

many programmes, activities and movements. Some of these
programmesaresummarizedhere:

1] State conferences: Punjab: August 2007,

October 2011, Jharkhand 2009, Bihar September
2009,UKAugust2010.InUPPoorvanchalSanskritik
Manch, Bharat Nau Jawan Sabha, Inqilabi Chatra
MorchaandaKisanSanghatanhavebeenincluded
RDFconstituents.

2] Aleafletwasissuedonstaterepressioninmany
statesincludingAP.Inthecentralleafletparticularly
theorganisationdemandedunconditionalreleaseof
comradesVVandKalyanaRaoandalsodemanded
thewithdrawalofbanonmassorganizationsinAP.
We also demanded unconditional release of CPI
(Maoist) leader comrade Shushil Roy and other
comrades,withdrawalofbanonCPI(Maoist)anda
stoptoencounterkillings.Theorganisationcalledfor
withdrawalofcasesagainstmassactivistsandastop
to combing operations. A week against state
repressionwasobservedfrom12Sept19Sept2005
inallstateswhereRDFstartedfunctioning.

3] AnallIndiaFactfindingteamwasformedand
touredAPontheissuesofstaterepression,political
murders by the state and state violence that was
perpetratedinAP.About47massorganizationscame
togetherandheldapublichallmeetinginHyderabad
on26thSeptember2005atthebeginningofthefact
finding of the team in which 1200 people
participated. The team consisting of 9 members
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
316 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

alongwithmanylocalactiviststouredmanydistricts
and collected facts of violence on mass activists
between2630September2005.Ineverydistrictthe
teamvisited,apressconferencewasalsoheld.The
teamalsomettheCMandamemowassubmitted
against violence and repression on mass
organizations. At the end, the initial report was
releasedinapressconference.

1) Against the death sentence on the Bihar

peasants, RDF took up mass programmes in Delhi,
BiharandJharkhand.Arallyandaconventionwere
heldinDelhi.

2) RDF sent a factfinding team to study the

arrestsoftheMaoistleaderscomradesShushilRoy,
PatitpawanHaldarandothersbythefascistCPMled
WestBengalgovernment.Theteamalongwiththe
representatives of local civil rights organizations
wenttoJhargramjailandmetMaoistprisonersand
took long interviews with them. It also visited the
placeofarrestandinquiredwiththelocalpeople.It
wasmadeclearhowtheintelligenceandthepolice
usedillegalmethodsintheprocessofarrests.Onthe
next day, the team went to Krishnanagar jail and
triedtometcomradeAshokSarkarandotherMaoist
leaders.Butthejailsuperintendentdidnotallowthe
interview.Alsowenttotheplaceofarrestofthese
prisoners.Peopletheredescribedtheillegalandhigh
handedbehaviourofthepoliceatthetimeofarrest
tothe team. A CD ofthe interviewswithcomrade
ShushilRoyandotherswasreleasedalongwiththe
report in a press conference in Kolkata on 30th
December2005.

3) Between 28 January 2006, a campaign was

organizedbythestateunitsofRDFonthecallofthe
AllIndiaEContheunconditionalreleaseofPolitical
prisonerslikecomradesShushilRoy,Patitpawanand
others.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
317 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

4) Between 1925 January, 2006 a campaign

againstSalwaJuduminitiatedbyChhattisgarhGovt.
wasorganized.Thiswasimplementedbysomestate
unitsthroughwallwritingandleaflets.

5) In states including WB and Punjab, where

elections were taking place, election boycott call
wasimplementedandleafletsweredistributed.

6) Ontheoccasionof8March,2006International
Working womens day, RDF units participated and
helpedwomensorganizations.

7) On 23rd March, 2006 Bhagat Singhs

martyrdom was observed as antiimperialist day in
manystates.

8) RDF organized protest dharnas and marches

against the arrest of comrade Narayan Sanyal in
Delhiandmanystates.

9) RDFunitofDelhiparticipatedandinvolvedin
manyprogrammestakenupbyNepaliJanAdhikar
SurakhaSamithiandNBA.

10) Punjabunitorganizedprotestsagainstthevisit
of American President G. W. Bush. In many cities,
protestrallieswereorganizedonbroadmobilization
withthesloganBushGoBack.Inotherstatesalso
particularly Bihar similar joint programmes against
BushsvisittoIndiawereorganised.

11) A signature campaign was taken up in many

states against Salwa Judum and thousands of
signaturesweresenttothePresidentofIndia.

12) An international appeal was released by RDF

on the issue of Salwa Judum by the all India
Committeeandaskedtheinternationalorganizations
tosendhelptothevictimsofSalwaJudum.

13) RDF called a meeting of democrats and

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
318 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

peoples organizations on 23rd April 2006 and

appealedtothemtoworkontheissueofreleaseof
political prisoners. In this meeting a broad
understanding was arrived at by the prominent
personalities who participated in the meeting. A
Campaign Committee for the Release of Political
Prisoners was formed.It wasdecidedtocollect all
informationaboutpoliticalprisonersinvariousstates
andaperspectivewastobedrafted.Stateunitstobe
formed.Butwecouldntcarryoutthesetaskssofar.

14) An All India campaign against Salwa Judum

wasconductedfrom10Augustto10November2006
onthebannerofCATASwithateamofartistsfrom
Chhattisgarh Adivasi Kala Manch. RDF all India
committee members and prominent democrats
participated in many states like Kerala, Karnataka,
TamilNaidu,AP,Orissa,MR,WB,JH,Bihar,UP,UK,
Punjab,HaryanaandDelhi.AllIndiaECmembersled
thecampaigninvariousstates.SomemembersofAll
IndiaCommitteeshowedwaveringwhenstatetried
to stop or intervene in the campaign in AP and
Kerala. These very members created confusion and
didntproperlycarryouttheirresponsibilitiesbynot
stayingwiththeteamatsomeplacesandtimewhen
they were to perform. The culmination convention
was held in Delhi on 9 November and on 10
NovemberapublicrallywasorganizedinDelhianda
Memorandum with thousands of signatures of
adivasis was submitted to the President of India
demandinghimtointerveneandstopSalwaJudum.
Dr.BDSharma,DrVinayakSen,com.VaravaraRao
andotherswentinateamtothepresidentsoffice.
TheycouldntmeetthePresidentasappointmentwas
not finalised but the memo was accepted by his
office.

15) A bandh call was given by RDF NMSs and

Maoist leader com. Sheela Devi was arrested. The
RDF called for a 24 hours bandh in Orissa,
Jharkhand, and Bihar on 14th October, 2006.
Appealed to all sections of people in these three
statestoobservebandh(GeneralStrike)voluntarily
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
319 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

and make it a success. Also appealed to all

democraticorganizationstosupportthebandhcall.
ThebandhwasobservedinJharkhand,whereRDF
came up with posters and leaflets in support of
bandhandreleasedanoteinthepress.Abandhcall
isbasicallyapoliticalinitiativeandaskingpeopleto
involve in it is a political act which a political
organization like RDF should issue suchcalls. RDF
should not restrict itself to simple legalistic and
secure measures when state comes out with heavy
repressivemeasures.

16) A protestdharnawasorganizedin Delhiand

other states when CPI Maoist leader Dr.Osho alias
com.Narenderwasarrested.suchprotestscouldonly
be spontaneous and we very well know that
mobilizationwouldonlythatmuchaccordingtoour
strengthinDelhi.

17) ECdecidedtotakeupacampaignonAgrarian
crisis,farmersdebtburdenandsuicidesinthestates.
Somestateunitshavetakenupthisbybringingout
leaflets,postersandwallwriting.Acallwasissuedto
strengthen the peoples movement against these
issues.AsRDFstateunitsarestillweakthiscallhas
notyetbeenconvertedintoamovement.

18) Ahallmeetingandadharnawasorganizedin
Delhiandotherstateson10December2006against
death sentence awarded to Afzal Guru and Sadam
Hussain.Theseprotestsdemandedthecommutation
ofdeathsentencegiventoAfzal.

19) Participatedandpresentedapaperinaseminar
organized at Jamia Milia University conducted by
Nelson Mandela Centre for Peace and Conflict
Resolution on Chhattisgarh: Development, the
Naxalite Movement and Salwa Judum. The paper
focused and exposed on the antipeople policiesof
the socalled developmental model of the
Government and it was stressed that the Naxalism
wasntaproblembuttheanswertotheproblem.

20) On 23rd March2007,an all IndiaConference

againstdisplacementwasorganizedinRanchiwhere
antiimperialistdaywasobservedontheoccasionof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
320 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Bhagat Singhs 76th Martyrdom day. An all India

platform was formed with more than 100
organizationsandanother100individualdemocrats.
Animpressiverallywasorganizedattheendofthe
programme.

21) Against Nandigram and Singur incidents RDF

participated in dharnas and demonstrations along
with other democratic forces in front of the CPM
centralOfficeinDelhiinJanuaryandFebruary2007.

22) RDF called for a protest programme on the

next day in Delhi soon after Nandigram massacre
happenedonMarch14th.Manyforcesparticipated
init.Ademonstrationwasheld.

23) RDF EC Members went to Nanadigram soon

after 14th March massacre along with a team
includingBDSharmaandMedhaPatkar.Addressed
the press and released a report. The report was
releasedinDelhialso.

24) RDF EC decided to send a team of eminent

democrats for a factfinding on state repression in
OrissaJanuary2007.Prominentcivilrightsactivists
fromAP,andJharkhandvisitedplacesofrepression
andbroughtoutareport.

25) RDF representatives participated in a

conferenceagainstSEZsandNandigrammassacrein
Kolkataandpresentedapaper.Inthepresentation,
ourdelegatesarguedforaunitedmovementagainst
displacementandalsoforexcludingfundedNGOs

26) ThestateunitsofRDForganizedprogrammes
about 150 years of 1857 and Bhagat Singhs Birth
Centenaryyear.

27) A call was given to take up campaign of

EconomicBlockade tobeobservedon26,27June
2007 against displacement, emergency day and
imperialismontheoccasionoftheNaxalbariDay.It
wasimplementedinJharkhandandWBtoanextent.
In Delhi some campaign in terms of propaganda
happened.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
321 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

28) Nagalandtrip27Juneto2August2007.A6
memberdelegationwenttoNagalandtoappealNaga
people to demand the withdrawal of 9IRBNaga
battalion.Thetripwasasuccessandgoodrelations
have been developed with Naga peoples
organisations.
29) In Orissa anti displacement conference was
organisedbysomeelementsofND.Weparticipated
initandeffectivelyintervenedtopreventyetanother
committee to be formed; our political intervention
becamefruitfultocorrecttheresolutionthere.

30) RDF local unit of Jharkhand worked for the

conventioninJanuary2007andlaterconferencein
March2007whereabroadbasedantidisplacement
frontwasformed.

31) RDF has participated to implement All India

BandhCallgivenbyVVJAon30October,2007.The
bandh was successfully organised in Jharkhand. In
other states, the call was implemented by various
organisations.

32) Our RDF unit of Punjab had organized an

impressive programme on 28th September 2007 at
HussainiWala.

33) VisitofNagainIndiatoexposethefallaciesof
peace talk going between NSCN(IM) and GOI in
2008.

34) ASignatureCampaignforthereleaseofSeela
Didihadbeentakenandhadmadearepresentation
toWomencommission.Afactfindingteamofwomen
hadvisittheprisontomeetSeelaDidiinJharkhad.
TherewasaresolutiontomeetPresidentregarding
thiscase.

35) JoseMariaSisonwasarrestedbytheHolland
PoliceunderthepressureofUSimperialist.RDFhad
issued a press statement and sent a message in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
322 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

solidarity to ILPS against the arrest of Jose Maria

Sison,thefoundingleaderofPhilippinescommunist
party. Rdf had taken part in the joint protest
programmeinDelhi.

36) A blog was stared named rdf

2005.blogspot.com, but has not put information
regularlyinit.

37) Fact finding team had visited in Lalgarh in

solidaritywithpeoplesmovementandtoexposethe
atrocitiescommittedbyJointforces.

38) WaronPeople

a) Cultural events and Talk has been organised

underbannerofWAPon13November,2009inDelhi
University

b) In context of declaration of Operation Green

Hunt, All India Convention Against War on People
was organised in Constitutional Club on 4 th
December,2009.AallindiaRallyandpublicmeeting
washeldinDelhionthe17thDecember.

c) The Public Meeting to demand the judicial

enquiryinto the killingsofAzad,the spokesperson
andPolitBureaumemberoftheCPI(Maoist)along
with journalist Hem Chandra Pandey at Rajendra
Bhavan,NewDelhiwasaddressedbyalargenumber
of prominent citizens in the presence of packed
auditorium.Itwasheld on3rd August,2010.Itwas
heldunderbannerofConcerendCitizenandForum
againstwaronpeople.

d) The Public Meeting to demand the judicial

enquiryinto the killingsofAzad,the spokesperson
andPolitBureaumemberoftheCPI(Maoist)along
with journalist Hem Chandra Pandey at Rajendra
Bhavan,NewDelhiwasaddressedbyalargenumber
of prominent citizens in the presence of packed
auditorium.Itwasheld on3rd August,2010.Itwas
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
323 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

heldunderbannerofConcerendCitizenandForum
againstwaronpeople.

e) RDF take initiative to hold a public meeting on

slogan STOP ARMY ENCROACHMENT IN BASTAR!
AndOPPOSEINDIANSTATESWARONPEOPLE!On
21 May 2011 in Delhi under banner of FORUM
AGAINSTWARONPEOPLE.TheSpeakersinmeeting
were A B Bardhan, General Secretary, CPI, Amit
Bhaduri,ProfessorEmeritus,JNU,Aparna,CPI(ML)
New Democracy, Arjun Prasad Singh, PDFI,
Arundhati Roy, Writer, B D Sharma, Girija Pathak,
CPI(ML) Liberation, Madan Kashyap, Hindi writer,
PankajBisht,Editor,Samayantar,SARGeelani,Delhi
University,SashiBhushanPathak,PUCL,Jharkhand,
Sumit Chakravarti, Editor, Mainstream. In meeting
resolutionwaspassedtowithdrawarmyfromBastar
deployedinnameoftrainingschool.

f) Antiwarfrontsareformedinsevenstates.Atleast
in5stateswehavetoformsimilarfrontsassoonas
possiblesuchasinMaha,UP,Bihar,OrissaandChh.
There is also a need to develop the coordination
betweenallthefronts.Furtherwiththefastchanging
scenario on a day to day basis there is a need to
maketheactivitiesofthefrontsmorevibrantwith
larger massparticipation.As ofnowthe numerous
programmesthatarehappeninginvariousstatesare
scatteredandunsystematic.Thereisanurgentneed
for coordination of all these initiatives that are
fundamentallybeingtakenupthroughourforces.

g) OGH&Evaluation:Theaggressiveposturesofthe
rulingclassesinthecontextofthewaragainstpeople
have brought forth many aspects ofthe movement
whichledtoapublicdebatethatseemstobehaving
a wider impact. We have been successful in
establishing amonga wide section of the informed
people that this is nothing short of a war on the
people.Thishasalsogalvanizedmanymoreelements
intothecampaign.Thishasfurthermadethestate
defensive.Thestatecouldnotanticipatethemanifold
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
324 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

responsesthatcameagainstthewarfromtheurban
spaces so much so that it desperately started
attacking the urban intelligentsia against its
opposition.Thiscreatedabacklashwhichthestateis
findinghardtowardaway.Thecontradictionswithin
thecongressarereflectingintheformofthoseforces
whicharedirectlyundertheinfluenceofimperialist
corporationsandthosewhichareundertheinfluence
offeudalforces.Inthecontextoftheavailablespace
that is there to project our movement in a larger
landscapeweshouldbeabletoeducatetherankand
fileabouttheneedtopropagatethevariousaspects
ofthemovement.

39) PublicProtestMeetingagainstFakeEncounter
KillingofMaoistLeaderKishenjiwasheldinGandhi
PeaceFoundation,Delhion13December,2011.This
meetingwasorganisedbyBahujanVamManch,CPI
(ML), CPI (ML) New Proletariat, Democratic
Students Union, IFTU, Inquilabi Majdur Kendra,
Krantikari Navajawan Sabha, Lok Raj Sangathan,
NavajwanBharatSabha,NDPI,PDFI,PeoplesFront,
PUDR, Revolutionary Democratic Front, and other
organizationsandindividuals.

40) InDecember,2009RDFtookinitiativetoform
a Committee named friends of Telangana in
solidarity of Telangana statehood movement and
participate and organised various programme in
supportofmovement.

41) MeetingonGPCRdidnotmaterialise.

42) Cultural team from Lalgarh had visited in

various state calling to support Lalgarh movement
exposingCPI(M)ssocialfascistcharacter.
43) Meeting with the smallscale industrialist and
traderswasheldon13April2010.
44) On IndoUS nuclear treaty protests were
organised.
45) LALGARHsolidarityMovement
46) AnuradhaGandhiMemorialCommittee
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
325 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

47) ElectionBoycottProgram
48) RDFwillparticipateinprogramofCRPPand
help to develop CRPP, PDFI and VVJA in various
states.
49) CentralLeafletonCorruptionandAnnahazare,
OerationGreenHunt,Nandigram,

50) International
a) ICWOP,B)ICRPP,C)OnSolidarityforumNepal
b) 12 June took place in London an important
initiativeoftheInternationalCommitteeAgainstthe
WaronPeopleinIndia(ICAWPI).About500people
crowdedthehalloftheFriendsHouseinLondonand
attended with attention and participation, even
emotional, at the program.
Onthewallsoftheroomstoodouttwolargebanners
signedICAWPIwithpicturesofthestrugglesofthe
Adivasipeople,thefiercewaronpeopleunleashed
by the regime in India, the many initiatives of
solidarityheldaroundtheworld.Therewerealsothe
postersofthecampaign"weekofsolidarity"thatthe
InternationalCommitteetoSupportthePeople'sWar
inIndiahadpostedthroughoutEuropeandaround
theworldandtheslideshowthatinthesameweek
hadbeenusedinItaly.thismeetingwasaddressedby
ArundhatiRoyandJanMyrdal
c) OnILPSmeetingandcontradiction
d) Visit of dave Pugh to study anti displace
movementin2008
e) Visitofantiimperialistcamptohelptheadivasis

ResolutiononECFunctioningandDevelopmentof
theOrganisation:

The all India EC discussed and analyzed the

weaknessesinitsfunctioningandinimplementingits
planned activities. After discussing different points
thoroughlythefollowingdecisionsaretaken:

11 RDFsstrengthliesinitsstateunits.Sothefirst
priority is to strengthen its state units and the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
326 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

constitute organizations in each state wherever the

stateunitsarealreadyinexistence;

12 AllECmembersshouldalsofocustheirattention
inoneormorestatestodevelopstateunits;

13 Bytakingupthepeoplesburningissuesineach
state, our state units and their constituent
organizations should go to the people and organize
strugglesbytakingourpoliticstothem;

14 We should plan our programme based on our

manifestoconcretelylinkingitupwiththepresentlocal
problemsofthepeopleineachstate;

15 ThepoliticalactioncallsgivenbytheallIndiaEC
shoulddirectlyreflectthegroundlevelproblemsofthe
people,whereinthelocalunitscanimplementthecalls
bylinkingthemwithlocalburningissuesofthepeople;

16 TheallIndiaECmembersshouldworkinclose
coordination with each other and particularly the
officebearers should also meet whenever needed to
interveneintoallmajorburningissueswhichcomeup
timetotimeatallIndialevelandatdifferentlevelof
states;

17 AllissuesthatvariousECmembersareinvolved
in building struggles through different fronts should
sharevariousaspectswiththeentireECsothattheEC
willhavecomprehensiveideaaboutallactivities;

18 A workshop will be conducted with the EC

members of each state committee on organizational
andpoliticalgrowthoftheorganizationinconnection
withtheRDFsmanifestoandjointactivities;

19 Allreportsfromthestatesshouldbepresentedin
writtenformindetail;

20 Press statements should be issued on all such

burningissuesimmediatelyandtheyshouldsenttothe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
327 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

stateunitsand

21 Inadditiontootherresponsibilitiesindifferent
frontseachECmemberisalreadyinvolvedthespecific
statewise responsibilities for building RDF are
entrustedhereasfollows:

ResolutiononStateLevelStructures:
All the state units should drive the constitute
organizationstotakeuppeoplesissuesandstrengthen
eachorganization.

Each state unit should take up membership drive

through their constituent organizations and they
shouldalsogiveindividualmembership.

Ourweaknesses:
Politicalweakness:OnbehalfofRDFwehaveindeed
triedtotakeourpoliticstothemassesthroughour
central and state units. And we have been able to
take the revolutionary message among the masses.
But our activities have remained restricted to a
limited circle only. We are yet to reach out to the
broadermassesofworkers,peasantsandintellectuals
to organize them in an antiimperialist antifeudal
mass struggle. We are far behind in qualitatively
developing the revolutionary and political
consciousness of workers, peasants, women,
students,youthsandoppressednationalitiesaswell
asinbuildingtheirabilitiestoresist.Thestrengthof
RDF is concentrated mainly among its state units.
These state units so far have not been able to
organizethebroadermassesaroundthemnorcould
they establish the aims of establishing a new
democraticsocietyinthemasses.Wehavefailedto
minglewiththemasses,tolearnfromthemasses,to
arouse consciousness among the masses and to
organizethem.

Organizationalweakness:Inthepastsevenyearswe
have been able to form state unitsof RDF onlyin
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
328 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Punjab, Delhi, Jharkhand, Bihar, West Bengal,

Uttarakhand and Kerala. Even these units are
structurallynotyetstrongsincetheconstituentunits
of workers organization, peasants organization,
womens organization, students organization or
intellectuals organizations are organizationally
weak. In some states no other constituent
organization has been formed apart from the state
committee.
ThestateunitsofHaryanaandU.Phaveremained
ineffectiverightfromthebeginning.InOrissaeven
beforetheformationoftheunit,RDFwasbannedby
the fascist state government. We have established
contacts with people in Maharashtra, Karnataka,
TamilNaduandAssambutwehavenotbeenableto
formstateunitsyetintheseplaces.
Overall one can say it is the failure, inability and
loosefunctioningoftheCentralWorkingCommittee
andofthestateunitsthatweareyettoreachmany
ofthestatesofthecountry,andeveninplaceswhere
our units are present, we are yet to establish our
organizationstrongly.

Weakness in publication: According to the central

manifestoofRDF,therewasadecisiontopublishtwo
magazines: Peoples Resistance in English and Jan
PratirodhinHindi.AmongthesetheHindimagazine
issomehowbeingpublishedalbeitirregularly.There
isnoconcretegroupofeditors.Thestateunitsare
notbeingabletocontributetoomuchwithwritings.
The English journal Peoples Resistance is yet to be
published. Alongside that the decision to regularly
publish on various politicalissues,state repression,
peoplesmassmovements,culturalissuesetcisalso
notbeingfulfilled.

FinancialWeaknesses:ForthefinanceofRDFaspar
the manifesto, it is mainly dependent on the state
units.Itwasdecidedthatthestateunitswillcollect
funds for all central activities. The state units will
collect money from its members, sympathizers,
constituent organizations and larger masses. The
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
329 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

centralcommitteehasindeedbeenhelpedbysome
ofthestateunitswithcollectedfunds.Butthatisnot
enough. Some of the state units have remained
completelyinactiveinthiscontext.Withoutfundsno
organizationcanrunitself.Forthedevelopmentof
any organization too, financial selfsubservience is
necessary.
Comrades,
TodaywehavegatheredfortheAllIndiaconference
of RDF. This Conference is the highest platform of
our organization. We will determine our
revolutionary future from here. We have kept our
centralreportinfrontofyouwhichisbasedonthe
reportreceivedfromvariousstateunits.Ifyouthink
there are still some errors in the report then we
welcomeyoursuggestions.Wehumblyreiteratetoall
thecomradesthatwemuststrivetofulfilltheaims
and objectives and political activities that we have
resolved in our manifesto. We appeal to all our
members from various states to fight liberalism,
individualismandsubjectivismtounitetogetherand
establish a political collective leadership. We must
unitewiththelargermassofpeopleandidentifyand
understand their problems. We have to politically
motivate and guide people in understanding the
rootsoftheproblemsaswellasleadthemintheir
struggles.Themembersofthestatecommitteesmust
keepinregularcontactwithothermembersaswell
aswiththemembersofthecentralcommitteeand
constituent organizations, so that on any issue a
commonandcollectiveunderstandingandconcrete
politicalreactionscanbemadeacrossallunits.Itis
throughunityandcollectiveleadershipthatwecan
overcome all our limitations and weaknesses and
intensifytherevolutionarymassmovement.
Thestrengtheningandsustenanceofthestateunits
are mainly contingent on strengthening the
constituent organizations like the organizations of
theworkers,peasants,students,youths,womenand
that of cultural activists. Launching membership
campaignsisimportantforthis.Alongwithworksin
theurbanareasouractivitiesmustbespreadinthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
330 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

villagestoo.Withcourageandpatiencewemusttake
themessageandpoliticsofantiimperialistandanti
feudal movements clearly and imaginatively to the
people.
The final conclusion and the success of this
conferencewillbeachievedifweareabletoacquire
a new revolutionary zeal from this assembly. The
broader masses are the source ofour strength.We
must have complete faith in the people. We must
boldly associate with the people to build the anti
imperialist antifeudal mass movements. We must
intensify our movementtobuildanewdemocratic
India. The strength of exploited and oppressed
massesisboundless.Thepeoplearetherealheroes.
Thevictoryofthepeopleiscertain.

InquilabZindabad!
Redsalutetoalldelegates!

434] This letter shows about work of RDF organization and
activities and responsibilities of RDF and directions issued to RDF
organizationsinallStatestostrengtheneachorganizationandalsoto
takemembershipandtocometogethertounderstandtheirproblems.

435] Inthedocumentatpageno.17ofExh.267takenoutfrom
the hard disc Exh.4 having path Exh.22/recovered folder/folder
003/Secretary's report, titled as Secretary's report regarding
reviewofRDFworksinceitsformationitisstatedthatRDFinthe
presentformemergedontheNaxalbariday23rdMay2005merging
theearliertwoorganizationsAIPRFandSFPRwhichimpactstartedas
oneorganizationin1991,AIPRF.ItisfurthermentionedRDFsenta
fact findingteam to study the arrestsofMaoist leaders; Comrades
SushilRoy,PalitPawanHaldarandothersbythefacistCPMledWest
BengalGovernment.Itisfurtherstatedbetween28January2006a
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
331 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

campaignwasorganizedbythestateunitsofRDFonthecallofthe
AllIndiaEContheunconditionalreleaseofpoliticalprisonerslike
comradesSushilRoy,PalitPawanandothers.ItisfurtherstatedRDF
unitofDelhiparticipatedandinvolvedinmanyprogrammestakenby
NepaliJanadhikarSurakshaSammitteeandNBA.

436] Itisstatedinthesaiddocumentthatasignaturecampaign
was taken in many states against Salwa Judum and thousands of
signaturesweresenttothePresidentofIndia.

437] Itisstatedinthesaiddocumentthatahallmeetinganda
dharnawasorganizedinDelhiandotherstateson10December2006
againstdeathsentenceawardedtoAfzalGuruandSaddamHussain.
Theseprotestsdemandedthecommutationofdeathsentencegivento
AfzalGuru.

438] ItisstatedinthesaiddocumentthatAgainstNandigram
andSingurincidentsRDFparticipatedindharnasanddemonstrations
alongwithotherdemocraticforcesinfrontoftheCPMcentralOffice
in Delhi in January and February 2007. RDF called for a protest
programmeonthenextdayinDelhisoonafterNandigrammassacre
happenedonMarch14th. Manyforcesparticipatedinit. Ahuge
demonstrationwasheld.RDFECMemberswenttoNandigramsoon
after 14th March massacre along with a team including BD100%
Sharma and Medha Patkar. Addressed the press and released a
report.ThereportwasreleasedinDelhialso.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
332 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

439] ItisstatedinthesaiddocumentthatThetaskofRDFisto
servePeople'sDemocraticRevolution.Ithastobuildastrongalliance
ofrevolutionaryclassesofpeopleandmobilisethemintotheongoing
revolutionarytask.Thistaskcannotbefulfilledbyremaininginthe
legalistic methods of undertaking struggles. The Indian state has
recognisedtherealnatureofthisorganisationevenbeforeitcame
intocompleteshape and organiseditself. ItwasbannedinOrissa
beforeacommitteewasformed.ThePrimeMinistermentioneditin
themeetingofChiefMinisters,whichwasplanningtosuppressthe
revolutionarymovement.ThecentralHomeMinistryalsomentioned
theorganisationintheirreportbysayingthatthisisoneorganisation
throughwhichMaoistaretryingtocoordinatethemselvesatallIndia
level. Allmajornewspaperspublishedthesedetailsinfrontpages.
WedecidedtoformtheorganisationatUGlevel,whereverthestate
doesn't allowustofunction. Thetaskaheadistremendous. The
challengesaremanifold.Butourstrengthisstilllimited.Inorderto
meet our objective of serving the People's Democratic Revolution
directly, by mobilising the revolutionary masses, we need to
meticulouslyplanandorganisepeopleofvarioussections.

440] ItisstatedinthesaiddocumentthatRDFallIndiaFChas
become only a conveyor of the decisions of the CC to our mass
organizations. It is merely working as a liaison body, instead of
organizingthemassesfortherevolutionundertheleadershipofthe
party. Another point in the development of the RDF is the
developmentoftheconstituentorganizationsofthestateunitslike
the students, youth, womens, farmers,workersandculturalfronts.
We have to pay proper attention in developing these basic mass
organizations to carry out programmes of action effectively by the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
333 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

RDF.Thenewdemocraticunitedfrontalactivitycanbetakenuponly
when our basic mass organizations are strong enough to take the
politicalcallsofthefederationwhichisformedwithabasicviewto
propagate revolutionary agenda among the broader masses by
effectively countering the ruling classes reactionary politico
ideologicaloffensiveontherevolutionarymasses.

441] Itisstatedinthesaiddocumentatpointno.6thatSome
comradesintheECseethearmedstrugglecounterposingthemass
movement. Manytimes,theyraisethiswithindividualmembersof
theECandatothertimestheyguidethecadresindifferentstates
withthisviewdirectlyorindirectly. Anyarmedactiononthestate
forces and enemy classes in any state by the Party evokes sharp
reactionsamongthesemembersandtheyfreelycommentamongthe
activistssayingthatmassmovementsfaceseverehurdlesbecauseof
thesearmedactions. Theyalsomaintainthatmassessufferdueto
thesearmedactions.Whennewspaperstrytopaintwrongpictureof
thePartywhenPartyconductsarmedactionsontheenemyforcesby
sayingthatinnocentpeoplehavebeenkilled,thesecomradeswithout
verifyinganydetailstheyliberallysharetheviewspropagatedbythe
bourgeois newspapers and negative comments are passed by these
comrades.

442] Itisstatedinthesaiddocumentatpageno.24,pointno.6
that These views in the ultimate analysis reject the political
understandingthattheprotractedpeople'swarasthebasislineand
armedstruggleasthemainformofstruggleinasemifeudalandsemi
colonialcountrylikeIndia.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
334 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

443] Itisstatedinthesaiddocumentatpageno.24,pointno.7
struggle is the means to unity and unity is the aim of struggle.
ExpandingArmies,establishingdemocraticbaseareasonanextensive
scale,buildingupcommunistorganizationsthroughoutthecountry,
developingnationalmassmovementsoftheworkers,peasants,youth,
womenandchildren,winningovertheintellectualsinallpartsofthe
countryandspreadingthemovementforconstitutionalgovernment
amongthemassesasastrugglefordemocracy.

444] Itisstatedinthesaiddocumentatpageno.26and27,
pointno.7Prakashfailedtofinalisetheprogrammeandconstitutinof
A4 by incorporating amendmentsacceptedinthe conference. The
inordinatedelayhadhappenedbecauseofseveralreasons.Firstofall
hemadeseveralrevisionsofthedraftwiththehelpofTM/BDSand
RR. This took a lot of time. After this when the draft almost
finalised,theharddiskofPrakash'scomputergotcrashed.Hemade
severaleffortstoretrievethedatabutcouldn'tretrieveit.Meanwhile
PrakashwasnotwellandhefacedseveralproblemscomradeJaddu
advisedPrakashtoredothefinalisationofthedraftwithouthanding
overthisworktoanyoneelse.

445] From this document it isclearthat it isadocument in

respectofmergingoftwoorganizationsi.e.AIPRFandSFPRintoRDF
which is an organization through which Maoist are trying to
coordinatethemselvesinIndiaanditfurthershowsthatRDFisthe
developmentofStateUnitslikestudents,women,farmers,workers
andculturalfronts. Inordertoprovethataccusedno.6Saibabais
using pseudo name Prakash and he made correspondence with
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
335 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ComradesofCPI(Maoist),prosecutionhasreliedonthisdocumentin
whichitismentionedthatPrakashfailedtofinalisetheprogramme
andconstitutionofA4byincorporatingamendmentsacceptedinthe
conference and when the draft almost finalised the hard disk of
Prakash'scomputergotcrashed.

446] According to prosecution Prakash means accused no.6

Saibabaandthis fact isclearfromthedocumentatPageno.17of
Exh.267inwhichitismentionedthatPrakashfailedtofinalisethe
programme and when the draft almost finalised the hard disk of
Prakash'scomputergotcrashed.OnperusalofCFSLreport(Exh.267)
it reveals that in CFSL report (Exh.267) on the last page it is
mentioned that the harddiskin Ex.1couldnot be detectedinthe
Cyber Forensic Scientific Laboratory and hence data could not be
retrieved fromthe harddiskandthesaidharddiskisthesameas
referredatpageno.17ofExh.267.Hence,itrevealsthatsaidcrashed
harddisk was sent to CFSL Bombay alongwith other electronic
devices(Art.1to41)anditcouldnotbeopenedintheCyberForensic
ScientificLaboratory.ItisclearthatthenamePrakashmentionedin
theSecretary'sreportatpageno.17ofExh.267isnothingbutaccused
no.6Saibaba.

447] Itisstatedinthesaiddocumentatpageno.27,pointno.7
thatacorecommitteewasformedtocoordinatetheantidisplacement
frontwork.WhereverthecoremembersareworkinginthoseStates
theworkisprogressing.Butabouthalfofthemembersnamedbythe
SUCUMOdidnotjointhecorecommittee. Asaresulttheworkin
thosestateshasbeenlaggingbehind.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
336 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

448] Itisstatedinthesaiddocumentatpageno.29,pointno.9
SofaralltheprogramescamefromtheCCandthroughSUCOMOin
thissense,theFC/EClacksinitiative.

449] Itisstatedinthesaiddocumentatpageno.29,pointno.9
thatanotherproblemwiththepresentFCisthatittakesupproject
basedworkratherthantakingupcontinuousandplannedworkof
building struggles and organisation. The FC membersare so over
burdenedwithprojectbasedworkthatcomesfromtheSUCUMO/CC
thatwhateveristakenupearlierisdroppedofdelayedingettingit
implemented. For example, the work on Political Prisoners got
inordinatelydelayedduetothis. OtherECmembersdon'tshoulder
any responsibility. Some others only attend the EC meetings and
workintheirstates.SoweneedtodeveloptheECinsuchawaythat
the FC members are not overburdened and the decided work is
sharedamongtheactiveECmembers.

450] Itisstatedinthesaiddocumentatpageno.26,pointno.7
ThewholehouserejectedJosephandreiteratedthatPrakashshould
be the chief coordinator. All of them unanimously said that if
Prakashwouldn'tacceptthereshouldbenochiefcoordinator.The
presidium ruled that despite Prakash's rejection, he had to do it
because the whole house expressed confidence in him. Finally
Prakashagreedtotheresolution.

451] In print out at page no.33 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.3/newfolder(2)/allmetters1/photos/rdfconvestion there is
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
337 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

photographofaccusedno.6Saibabaaddressingtothepeopleunder
the banner of RevolutionaryDemocraticFront (RDF) ALL INDIA
FIRSTCONFERENCE.

452] In printout at page no.35 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.3/C/NewFolder(2)/AllMettersI/photos/C.R.P.P.programmes
thereisphotoofaccusedno.6Saibabaandthereappearsameeting
under the head of banner Release all political Prisoners
unconditionally and in that meeting accused no.6 Saibaba is
addressingtothepeople. Thisshowsthat accusedno.6Saibabais
theactivememberofbannedorganization.

453] One document at page no.41 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/Oct.2010/people res/material on JP/interview with
G.N.Saibaba is having photo of accused no.6 Saibaba below the
titled as, Interview of G.N. Saibaba on the Revolutionary and
DemocraticMovementsinIndiainwhichhestatedthathestarted
workingin an antiimperialist organizationformedat the allIndia
levelcalled AllIndiaPeoples'ResistanceForum(AIPRF) andthe
AIPRF in 2005 merged with other similar organizations to form
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF).Inmoststates,itsmembers
andmainfunctionariesarearrestedandincarcerated.Hundredsofits
functionarieseithersufferinprisonsorworkindifferentforms.Inhis
interviewaccusedSaibabarepliedtooneofthequestionthattheRDF
believesthatmilitantmobilizationofbasicclassesofthepeopleisthe
only way to democratize the SouthAsian Subcontinent. RDFalso
involvesinbuildingandparticipatinginthelargerUnitedFrontsof
differentdemocraticandantiimperialistforcesinthecountry.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
338 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

454] Fromthisdocumentitrevealsthataccusedno.6Saibaba
during interview stated that AIPRF merged with other similar
organizationtoformRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)frontal
organizationofCPI(Maoist)anditsmembersarebeingbrandedas
linkswithCPI(Maoist).Fromthisinterviewitclearlyrevealsthatthe
natureofthecommunistmovementinIndiahascompletelychanged
withtherise of the Naxalbari revolutionandRDFpromotswayof
NaxaliteguerrialsandthebannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)supports
allthemovementsofRDFcontinuouslytobuildrelationshipbetween
them. Thisdocumentalsoshowsthat40to50%ofwomenarethe
party members in the banned organization CPI (Maoist) and its
frontalorganizationRDFandtheAadiwasipeoplehavebeenresisting
undertheleadershipofnaxalitesandorMaoist.Fromthisdocument
itclearlyrevealsthatthebannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)andits
frontalorganizationRDFareworkinginAadiwasiareainGadchiroli
district.

455] Onpageno.54ofExh.267havingpath Exh.4/All/Tehelka

titledasTehelkathereisphotographofaccusedno.6Saibabaand
at the beginning accused no.6 G.N. Saibaba stated that the real
alternativewillcomefromthemaoistsandatthelaststatedthatthe
growthoftherevolutionarymovementunderCPI(Maoist)hasalways
remained outside of the electoral rat race. According to the
governmentfigures,ithasgrownin200districtsacrossthecountry.
The changing ruling parties in various states and their devious
electoral theatrics are irrelevant in the growth of the Maoist
movement. In West Bengal, it grew even when the socialfascist
CPI(M)wasinpowerwithallitsrepressivemechanism.Itisgrowing
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
339 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

becauseofitsincreasingmassbaseandthesupportofthepeople.
Irrespective of the party in power, it has always fought the ruling
class.Whetheraparticularpartyiselectorallyoustedornotdoesnot
makeanydifferenceinthegrowthofthisrevolutionarymovement.
Tosaythisistostatethetruthasitexistsontheground.

456] Fromthisdocumentitrevealsthataccusedno.6Saibabais
activememberofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontal
organizationRDFwhichhasgrownin200districtsacrossthecountry.

457] The document at Page no.72 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/old EHD/old/all12345/PP/main decision(2) titled as Main
aspects**ofproceedingsofthePreparatoryCommitteeconvened
towards forming the Committee for the Release of Political
PrisonersshowsmeetingwasheldatRajendraBhawan,DeenDayal
Upadhyay marg, Delhi dated 20108 and it shows that some
resolutions were passed in the meeting i.e. release of political
prisoners,ondeathpenalty,condemnthesocalledwaragainstterror
oftheManmohanSinghGovernment.Exposetheantipeoplenature
of the HOAX of so called internal security threat and on prison
conditions. Itisalsomentionedinthesaiddocumentthat,Itwas
suggestedthatthePreparatoryCommitteeshouldhaveaConvenor's
team. After further deliberations along with the four member
presidium,G.N.Saibaba(Accusedno.6)andRonaWilsonwerealso
madepartoftheconveningbodyofthecommittee. Thus,thetotal
numberofmembersintheConvenors'Committeeequalledsix.Later
Prof. Amit Bhattacharya was declared the Coordinator of the
Convenor'sCommitteewiththeconsentofthehouse.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
340 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

458] Contents of the document clearly reveals that the

committee passed resolutions to release the political prisoners, on
deathpenaltyandcondemnthesocalledwaragainsttheterrorof
ManmohanSingh'sGovernment.Itshowsthattherewasdisaffection
againsttheGovernmentandtheysupportprisonersandthepersons
whoundergonedeathpenaltywholawfullypunished.

459] A document at Page no.75 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/oldEHD/old/all12345/PP/proceedings(1) titled as Main
aspects of proceedings of thePreparatory Committee convened
towards forming the Committee for the Release of Political
Prisoners held at Rajendra Bhawan, Deen Dayal Upadhyay marg,
Delhidated190108isaboutthereportofcommitteefortherelease
ofpoliticalprisonersandinthesaidmeetingoneoftheparticipantSir
Gilanipointedoutthewayinwhichprisonshavebecomethearenaof
politicalvendettaandtortureofisolationandincarcerationofpeople
belonging to specific communities. Further another participant
Surendra Mohan talked about the Salwa Judum in the State of
ChattisgarhwheretheStatehasusedtribalsagainsttheirownfellow
forestdwellers.FurtheroneoftheparticipantRonaWilsonstatedthat
the calculated hysteria of the so called war against terror and the
hype of Maoists being the single largest security threat in the
subcontinentastoldbynoneotherthanthePrimeMinisterofIndia,
along with the ruthless implementation of the policies of
Liberalization,PrivatizationandGlobalizationhavecreatedascenario
wherethegeneralmassesofthesubcontinentwasfacingtheworst
kindsofonslaughtsontheirrighttodissent.Fromthisdocumentit
reveals that participants i.e. leaders and activists of the said
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
341 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

committeearefightingforreleaseofprisonersthroughthestrategyof
Maoists and supporting ideology of Maoist in West Bengal, Tamil
Nadu,AndhraPradeshandMaharashtra.Further,itismentionedin
this document that some suggestions were made for sending the
invitationtotheorganizationsseparatelyandalsomentionedthatG
N Saibabahas informedtocontact themat the endofeachmail
content so that they will under the importance and his Email ID
namedasGNSaibaba:
gnsaibaba@gmail.com
isappearinginit.

460] Intheletteratpageno.78ofExh.267takenoutfromthe
harddisk Exh.4 having path Exh.4/OLD EHD/OLD/All
12345/ILPS/DearArman,addressedtoDearArmanitismentioned
that,AninternationalteamofILPStovisitareasofantidisplacement
movements in India in March 2008 tocome out withareport for
internationalpropoganda.TheteamwillalsotovisitChhattisgarhin
theareaeffectedbySalwaJudum,anareaofindigenouspeoplemost
serious affected in a major way. Other important areas, among
others, would be Nandigram and Singur West Bengal, Kalingar,
JagatisgapurandKashipurinOrissa,andJharkhand.theteamneeds
toinIndiaforatleast15days.FurtherILPStoaidandpromotethe
formation of international Solidariety Committees supporting and
taking up the issues of Indian Antidisplacement movement
particularlyinEuropeandAmericastostartwith.Theinternational
monopoly corporate houses that directly displace, kill, maim, rape
peopleinIndiaaretobetargetedinabigwaythroughcampaign.
Andattheendoftheletterthenameofaccusedno.6G.N.Saibaba
havinghisemailIDgnsaibaba@gmail.comismentioned.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
342 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

461] A letter at page no.81 of Exh.267 having path path

Exh.4/All old and new/others/international/dearGNSaibaba is

addressed to G.N. Saibaba by Ufuk Berdan, Chairperson of the
InternationalRelationCommissionATIK(AvrupaTurkiyeliIsciler
Konfederasyonu). ItshowsthattherewasinvitationtoArundthaty
RoytovisittheirorganizationandlastlycomplimentedG.N.Saibaba
tomeetthemsoonandwishhimallthebestinhisstruggle.

462] A document at page no.82 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/oldEHD/redpendrive/w02010/working dictionary/campaign/
India/correspondence isa DraftletteraddressedtoTheGeneral
Secretary,CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)inwhichthenameof
accusedno.6G.N.Saibabaisappearingattheendandthesaidletter
showsabouttheproblemsofAdivasiswhowerekilled,torturedand
raped and villages being burnt in the unprecedented military
operation of the Government of India and also suggested that the
militaryoffensivehasallthecharacteristicsofgenocidetohavebeen
launched on the tribal people of these regions and simultaneously
targetedagainsttheCPI(Maoist)andotherpeople'sorganizations.

463] Adocumentatpageno.84ofExh.267havingpath isa

DraftletteraddressedtoTheGeneralSecretary,CommunistParty
ofIndia(Maoist)inwhichthenameofaccusedno.6G.N.Saibabais
appearingattheendandthesaidlettershowsabouttheproblemsof
Adivasiswhowerekilled,torturedandrapedandvillagesbeingburnt
intheunprecedentedmilitaryoperationoftheGovernmentofIndia
and also suggested that the military offensive has all the
characteristicsofgenocidetohavebeenlaunchedonthetribalpeople
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
343 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

oftheseregionsandsimultaneouslytargetedagainsttheCPI(Maoist)
andotherpeople'sorganizations.Thecontentsofthesaiddocument
arereproducedasunder:Draftletter
To
TheGeneralSecretary
CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)

19February2010
Dear
We,agroupofdemocraticindividualsfromDelhi,
writetoyouamidsttheseriousturnofeventsinthe
last few months with the Government of India
declaringOperationGreenHunt(thoughtheUnion
HomeMinisterdeniedthisnamebeinggiventothe
militaryoperationatleastonceinthemedia)inthe
centralandeasternregionsofthetribalhabitats.We
hear with great pain and shock about officially
unsubstantiatedfiguresofadivasisbeingkilledand
thousandsbeingtortured,womenbeingrapedand
villages being burnt down in this unprecedented
militaryoperationoftheGovernmentofIndiaever
initiatedsince1947.

Weareawarethatthismilitaryoffensivehasallthe
characteristicsofgenocidetohavebeenlaunchedon
the tribal people of these regions and
simultaneously targeted against your party and
other peoples organizations. We have also openly
statedseveraltimesthatthismilitaryoffensiveisa
pretexttocleartheareasundermentionfromany
hurdlesthatwillcomeinthewayoftheunbridled
exploitation of forest and mineral wealth of the
region.Furtherwebelievethattheapproachofthe
GovernmentofIndiatolookatthewholequestion
asapurelylawandorderissuegoesagainstthevery
own conclusions arrived at through studies
undertakenbyitsowninstitutions.

Wehavegonethroughthestatements,appealsand
interviewsissuedbyyouandyourcomradesinthe
past six months responding to this situation
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
344 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

regarding your proposal of talks with the Union

Government.Weappreciateyourstandalongwith
thereasonableandjustifiedframeworkproposedfor
creatingthenecessaryconduciveatmospherebefore
anydialoguecouldtakeplace.Wehavealsobeen
keenlyfollowingthestatementsissuedbytheUnion
Home Minister, Mr P Chidambaram offering talks
with your party. He has modified his stand from
putting conditions like abandoning of arms to
abjuringofviolenceoverthemonths.

Weareoftheopinionthatitstheresponsibilityof
the Government of India to create conducive
atmosphere by suspending the military operations
andtemporarilyholdingbacktheparamilitaryand
othercombatforcesfromalltheseregionstoinitiate
a dialogue. Once the Government starts fulfilling
theseresponsibilities,wehopethatyourpartyalso
suspends all hostilities against the security forces.
Weproposethisnotasapreconditiononeitherside
butasconfidencebuildingexercisetomovetowards
afruitfuldialoguewhereintheUnionGovernment
andrespectiveStateGovernmentsononesideand
the CPI Maoist and various concerned peoples
organizations on the other. As of now, it is
unfortunatethattheGovernmenthasnottakenany
concrete steps towards this direction, though
reiteratedseveraltimesitsofferoftalks.

We are also of the firm opinion that the Union

Governmentshouldholdthisdialogueandnotthe
concerned State Governments as primarily the
Constitution of India reposes the responsibility of
theScheduledareasandthetribalpeoplethrough
its Fifth Schedule. Also since the grave issue in
questionisconcernedwithseveralstates,nopiece
meal effort like what had happened in Andhra
Pradeshbefore2004willyieldanyconcreteresults.

Wemakeitclearbeforeyourpartythatweareno
peacebrokers. We are neither pacifists nor do we
stand on behalf of any aggressive exploiter being
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
345 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

aware of the history of peoples struggles in this

countryingeneralandthatofthetribalpeoplein
particular.Thisproposalisbeingmootedprincipally
becauseweareconcernedaboutthepeopleasyou
are. We do not represent the government or your
partyinanyaway.

We would like to know the concrete steps and

framework of the political dialogue including an
understandingoffacilitatingtheprocessfromyour
sideauthoringustonegotiatewiththeGovernment
of India in this regard. We would like to have
comprehensiveandconcreteproposalstobesentto
usintheformofaletteraddressedtoussothatwe
canproceedasacollectivetoinitiateaprocesswith
theUPAalliancethatcommandsthegovernmentat
the Centre. This however doesnt mean that we
representyourpartyoranyotherorganization.We
onlyworktofacilitatethisprocess.Yourpartyisa
sovereignpoliticalorganizationtodecideaboutyour
emissariesandrepresentativesintheactualprocess
oftalksandtowardschartingthemodalitiesforthe
samedialogue.

Weexpectyourreplyattheearliest.

Insolidarityandconcern,

Prof.RandhirSingh,JusticeRajenderSachar,Dr.B
DSharma, Prof.ManoranjanMahanty, Arundhati
Roy, Prof. Amit Bhaduri, Sumit Chakravarty, G N
Saibaba (Accused no.6), Prashant Bhushan, P K
Vijayan,SARGeelani,SarojGiri,andKarenGabriel.

464] A document at page no.86 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/researchwork/IMP/ResearchWork/Researchplan/personnel/
personnel/personnel final/personal/contacts/final reply to Arman
letterbySaiisaletteraddressedtoDearComradeArman(AIPRF)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
346 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

byaccusedno.6Saibabainwhichhelastlysuggestedtodevelopthe
antiimperialist forces to the maximum possible and further stated
thattheirstrengthisnodoubtlimitedbutfocusitinadirectionto
give maximum results. Some recitals of the said document are
reproducedasunder:

Basically the ILPS Committee formed at the

internationallevelandthelocalbodyofMR2004
shouldactasfacilitatorstomaketheprogrammea
grandsuccess.

Nowforsomeotherpointsofclarificationtoyour
letter:
1)ThedraftonintroducingMR2004isnottobe
continuouslychangedbutwastobefinalizedbythe
list of initiators. This was a necessary democratic
procedure. Now, thiswillnotchange,andwillbe
theminimumbasistodrawinwiderparticipation.
Thosewhocannotacceptitwillsimplynotjoin.So,
thereneednotbeanyapprehensionthatthedraft
willbecontinuallychangedtosuittherequestof
the individual orgs. Practically, there were no
majorchangesproposedbytheInitiators.

2)FromSept5toNov.7theInitiatorswilltravelall
overthecountryfortheformationoftheReception
Committee and bring in a host of participating
organizations, all of whom will be called to a
meetinginMumbaionNov.9whereanOrganizing
Committeewillgetelectedofabout25persons.

Here we propose that ILPS and some of the

organizations from outside India particularly from
Philippines,TurkeyandEuropeshouldbetherein
theOrganizingCommittee.

The Initiators bodywilltherebyget dissolvedand

the OC will get formed and take on the central
responsibilityfortheMR2004,inconsultationwith
the participating organizations, both at the India
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
347 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

andinternationallevel.ILPSneedstoplayacrucial
role.

3)Regardingthetopicsfortheworkshopsandthe
plenarysessionswehavetaken intoconsideration
theproposalsoftheILPSmeetofJuly17andalso
theneedsofthelocalorganizationsinvolved.Being
held in India and with the bulk of the audience
being mobilized from here, quite naturally the
issuesmustberelevanttothoseattending.Wehave
tried to accommodate most of the subjects
suggestedattheILPSmeet.

4) Regarding the inclusion of other international

organizations the question of WPRM was already
settledintheILPSmeeting.TheGeneralSecretariat
MeetingoftheILPSsays,wprmcanjoinMR2004.
InIndiaitisasignificantforcesotheyshouldbe
approachedforsponsoringtheevent.

5)RegardingtheformationofILPSIndiaaspartof
thisprocess,asofnowwehavesomeproblemsto
be sorted out. Besides our organizations
representative in the ICC there is another
representative, Fatima; an NGO about whom we
knowlittle.Andthelittlethatwenowknowisnot
verypositive.Anyhow,therearealsoanumberof
otherparticipantsfromIndiaaswell.Someofthem
are the massfrontsfromtherevisionist partiesin
power.Evenwhenwegetreadytoworkwiththem,
theyrunaway,whiletheirpartiesinpower(West
Bengal) kill and unleash repression on us and
other sister organizations. At present we do not
havethesubjectiveforcestotakethestep;andifat
allwefeelitnecessarytodoso,itwillrequirefar
greaterdiscussioninthemotherorg.beforesucha
stepcanbeinitiated.Thattheantiimp.forcesinthe
countryhavetobeconsolidatedintheprocessisnot
debated; the question before us is how best this
couldbedonegiventhesubjectiveforcesavailable
tousandcomplexityofrelationsthatexistamong
themassfrontsinILPSfromIndia.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
348 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

6) Regarding MR 2004 we consider it a onetime

event and not any continuous process. As the
situationevolvesvariousformsandmethodsmaybe
necessary.

465] Fromthisdocumentitisclearthataccusedno.6Saibaba
hasinvitedtheComradesofMaoistOrganizationfromothercountries
toameetinginMumbaiwhereorganizingcommitteewillgetelected.

466] Inaletteratpageno.87ofExh.267 takenoutfromthe

harddisk Exh.4 having path Exh.4/all Old and new/news
addressedtoconcernedcomradesdated20.12.2010sentbyPrakash
andentireteam,inwhichitismentionedthatWearesurprisedto
seethemailcirculatedbytheAnuradhaGhandyMemorialCommittee
stating that Baburam Bhattarai would deliver this year's (3rd)
Anuradha Ghandy Memorial Lecture on 14th January, 2011 in
Mumbai. Further it is mentioned that we are pained to see
Baburam Bhattarai being selected to fondly recall such an ideal
revolutionary personality as Anuradha Ghandy not to say a role
modelforrevolutionarieswhofoughtrevisionism.Furtherourteam
discussedthisinternallyandfeltthatweshouldconveyourstrong
feelingsattheearliesttosomeofyouwhoareinvolvedinorganising
AnuradhaGhandyMemorialLectureeveryyear.Infactwearehighly
inspiredbyyoureffortstoconsistentlyorganisethememoriallecture
to remember and commit ourselves for the revolutionary work for
which Comrade Anuradha is a symbol. Further we will face
tremendouscriticismfromtherevolutionarypartiesandorganisations
fromallthecountrieswherewehavefraternalrelations. Wecan't
simply explain them in any way about this event as they are also
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
349 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

engagedinideologicalstruggleagainstthePrachandaBaburamclique
asmuchasweareinvolvedinthiscountry.

467] In letter at page no.88 of Exh.267 addressed to Dear

ComradebyPrakashandtheentireteam,itwassuggestedthatNow
asperthedraftconstitutionofA3asyouknowunitscanbebuiltwith
variousconstituentorganizations(NDRbasedMOs)intheareaorif
suchasituationisnotthereforanyreasonwecanalsobuilditasa
unitaryorganisationwithindividualmembers.Lastly,itwassuggested
thatOnApril22,(Lenin'sbirthanniversaryandformationdayofCPI
ML) in line with recent PB's suggestion, how would it be if we
conduct a small meeting with Marxist intellectuals and our open
activists and friends a discussion on Socialism and the need for
propagating Socialism as the only alternative to the crumbling
capitalism/imperialisminthepresentcontext.

468] In printout at page nos.90 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/All Sai/for study/latest/Vanja's Articles titled as I am
convincedtheNaxalites(Maoists)havealotofsupportinwhich
itismentionedthatAnewspaperandbananashelpedlinkupwith
Maoists.TheCommunistPartyofIndiaMaoist(CPIMaoist)askedC.
Vanaja twice to reach Chhatisgarh all the way from her home in
Hyderabadbutonbothoccasionshercontactsfailedtoturnupand
on third time, she was told to come with newspaper andbananas
pretendingtobeanordinaryvisitorandatthattime,Vanajadidthat
andmadecontactwiththehighlysecretiveMaoists.Fromthisletter,it
reveals that there is usual practice of Naxalites (Maoists) to use
newspaperandbananaspretendingtobeanordinaryvisitorandat
thattime,Vanajadidthatandmadecontactwiththehighlysecretive
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
350 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Maoiststocontactwiththeirsecretepersonswhichtheaccusedno.1
and2followedinthiscase.

469] A document at Page no.94 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/Old EHD/Read Pen Drive/WD 2010/Working Directory
2010/others/DantewadaPressRelease isa PressReleaseissuedby
RamannaSecretaryDKSZCCPI(Maoist)titledasTheclaimmade
by the government that 7 Naxals were killed by the CoBRA,
GreyhoundsandSPOsinanencounterbetweentheMaoistsand
thepoliceon10thNovember2009iscompletelyfalse!whereinit
ismentionedthattheclaimmadebytheGovernmentthat7'Naxals'
were killed by the CoBRA Greyhounds and SPOs in an encounter
between the Maoists and the police on 10th November 2009 is
completely false. In the said letter there was appeal to all the
democratic,progressiveandpropeopleorganisationsandindividuals,
democratic and civil rights organizations and activists, writers and
intellectuals, journalists, students and youth to come forward and
makealleffortstostopthisgenocideandbrutalrepressioncommitted
on the people by the Indian government and to punish the police
officersguiltyofthesecrimes.

470] This letter shows that police officers in India are first
targetofnaxalsandthatnaxalswanttopressurisetheGovernment.

471] A document at Page no.97 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/8 Oct 2012/120610DK/Martyrs DayEng titled as
Communist Party of India (Maoist) by Gudsa Usendi,
Spokesperson, Dandakaranya Special Zonal Committee, CPI
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
351 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(Maoist) headed by Observe Martyrs Week From July 28 to

August3!RedHomagetoOurPartysForefoundersandBeloved
TeachersComradesCharuMazumdarandKanhaiChatterjee!and
furtheritismentionedthatByvirtueofthesesacrifices,revolutionary
movementhasbeenadvancingraisingtheslogan NaxalbariEkHi
Rasta, with the aim of building liberated areas through areawise
seizure of political power. July 28 is an important day to
commemorate the sacrifices of all the martyrs and to rededicate
ourselvestofulfilltheircherisheddreams. Furtheritismentioned
thatrepressionalwaysleadstorevolutionisahistoricaltruth.Ideas
cannotbewipedoutbykillingpeople.Theissueofhunger,poverty,
unemployment, corruption,scams,pricehike,displacementetc.are
makingpeoplerestless.Noneoftheparliamentarypoliticalpartieshas
anycredibilityintheeyesofthepeople.Inthiscontext,thefactis
thattheMaoistPeople'sWarwhichismarchingaheadwithmatchless
sacrifices and heroic struggles, stands asa great inspiration to the
toilingmassesofthecountry.Let'spledgetoexpandthepeople'swar
across the length and breadth of the country and to intensify the
guerillawarbysafeguardingtheParty.Let'semulatetheidealsofthe
martyrs and propagate their spirited life histories among the vast
people. Withtheinspirationofthegreatmartyrs,let'sconsolidate
therevolutionarymovementaspertheaspirationsofthebillionsof
Indianoppressedmasses.

472] A Document at page no.99 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/Old EHD/OLD/All 12345/Concept of Revolutionary Mass
Organizations titled as Concept of Revolutionary Mass
Organizations (RMOs)showsthatnorevolutioncanadvanceuntil
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
352 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

andunlessthevastmassesaremobilizedtoactivelyparticipateona
massscaleinitandnotmerelystayaspassiveobservers. Todoso
requiresthattheparty,thepeople'sarmyandtheUFbeeffectively
consolidatedwhiledoingthemasswork. Buildingthesecretparty
deepamongstthemassesanddrawingthemintothearmedstruggle
and antiimperialist, antifeudal United Front can alone result in
effective wielding theseizureofpoliticalpower.Itfurthersuggests
that while people's war has already started in 17 states of India
revolutionarymassorganizationsmustemphasizetheiractivitieson
strengtheningthearmedstrugglesandbuildingarmieswhilecontinue
their mass movements like processions, Demonstrations, mass
meetings, Protest movements, street cornermeetings,seminarwith
intellectuals, cultural functions etc. In present day India armed
struggleandbuildingofarmyisthemaintaskofallRMOs. Inthis
connection we can remember and lean from Comrade Raja Mouli
(Prasad)whoplayedanimportantroleinsuccessfullybuildingthe
RYL in an underground way in the new situation of classenemy
throughoutIndia.

473] A document at page no.103 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/8Oct2012/BanonRdf/2012Gad_MS430banorder(PDF
files)titledasGovernmentofAndhraPradeshAbstractwrittenby
Minnie Mathew, Chief Secretary to Government reveals that
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)formedwiththemergerofAll
India People's Resistance Forum (AIPRF) and Struggling Forum for
People'sresistance(SFPR)inMay2005,isapartofTacticalUnited
Front,hasbeenindulginginthefollowingunlawfulactivitiesnamely,
1] Sub serving the interest and objectives of the
CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)whoseavowed
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
353 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

objectivesistooverthrowthelawfullyestablished
Government by means of force and violence
through terrorist activities involving the use of
firearmsandexplosives;

2]UrgingpeopletofightagainstthePoliceandjoin
theMaoistmovement;

3] Opposing and demanding stoppage of anti

extremist combing operations of the police and
securityforcesintheleftwingextremismaffected
area of the States and there by abetting and
encouragingtheviolentactivitiesofMaoist;

4] Organising dharnas, rallies and other forms of

agitationsinsupportoftheunlawfulactivitiesof
theCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)and

5] Opposing lawful actions of police and criminal

justice system and inciting the people to take
violence against the democratically elected
governmentestablishedbylaw.

474] Fromthedocumentatpageno.105ofExh.267takenout
from the hard disc Exh.4 having path Exh.4/Ritu 13 March/my
documents/DSU/from Jatinder/Democratic right movement/
Document, written by Santosh Kumar, Principal Secretary of
Government, itisclearthatitisanotificationtitledasTheOrissa
Gazette EXTRAORDINARY PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY HOME
DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATION DATED The 20 TH June 2006, having
totalthirteennumbersofnotificationsregardingbanonCommunist
PartyofIndia(Maoist),RevolutionaryDemocraticFrontEtc.

475] A document at page no.107 of Exh.267 is a Gazette

NotificationofHomeDepartmentofOrissaGovernmentdated20th
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
354 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

June 2006 wherein Revolutionary Democratic Front subserving the

interestsandobjectivesoftheCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist),has
beenindulginginthefollowingunlawfulactivities,namely:
(1) Sub serving the interest and objectives of the
Communist PartyofIndia(Maoist)whose avowed
objective is to over throw the lawfully established
Governmentbymeansofforceandviolencethrough
terroristactivitiesinvolvingtheuseoffirearmsand
explosives;

(2)UrgingpeopletofightagainstthePoliceandjoin
theMaoistmovement;

(3) Opposing and demanding stoppage of anti

extremist combing operations of the police and
securityforcesintheleftwingextremismaffected
area of the States and there by abetting and
encouragingtheviolentactivitiesofMaoist;

(4)Organisingdharnas,ralliesandotherformsof
agitationsinsupportoftheunlawfulactivitiesofthe
CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)and

(5)Opposinglawfulactionsofpoliceandcriminal
justice system and inciting the people to take
violence against the democratically elected
governmentestablishedbylaw.

Lastly, by this Notification, Orissa Government declared

the Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) to be an unlawful
associationwithimmediateeffect.

476] The Orissa Government has declared Jana Natya

Mandali, Chasi Mulia Samiti, Krantikari Kisan Samiti, Daman
Pratirodh Manch, Kui Lawenga Sangha, Bal Sangam as an
unlawfulassociationandthedocumentsareatPagenos.108to113.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
355 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

477] The above documents notifying RDF as a unlawful

associationbyAndhraPradeshandOrissaGovernmentwerefoundin
theharddiskseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.
ThisshowsthatRDFisinvolvedinunlawfulandterroristactivities.

478] A document at page no.114 of Exh.267 titled as

ExpressingSolidaritywithCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)
wherein it is appealed to continue on the path of Comrade Azad,
spokespersonforCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist).Itismentioned
inthesaiddocumentthatComradeAzadwouldhaveplayedavery
criticalanddecisiveroleatthecurrentjuncture:atatimewhenthe
reactionary Indian state on one hand has mobilized more than
250000policeandmercenaryforcesagainsttheMaoistpeopleswar
withintheframeworkofalargemilitarycampaigncalledOperation
Green Hunt, and on the other hand it is espousing a deceptive
propaganda about "peace talks" and "ceasefire." In the said letter
there was criticism on the Andhra Pradesh Government about the
death of Comrade Azad. The resistance of the masses under the
leadership of CPI (Maoist) against "Operation Green Hunt" that
spreadsacrosstwentystatesoutof28Indianstatesisaresistance
againstthecompradorpoliciesofthereactionaryIndianstatewhichis
makingpossiblethevastplunderandpillageofthenaturalresources
ofIndiabymultinationalcorporations.Intheprocessoftheongoing
resistance, which continuouslyexpandsandspreads,the massesof
peopleareselflesslygivingsacrificesandalsogivetoughblowstothe
viciousandrepressiveforcesofthereactionarystate.Theofficialsof
the reactionary Indian state and at its helm the Prime Minister,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
356 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ManmohanSingh,sincethelastfewyearsiscontinuouslydeclaring
thattheMaoistpeopleswaristhebiggestthreattotheIndianstate.
ThearmedstruggleandthecurrentpeopleswarinIndiathatisbeing
ledbyCPI(Maoist)isthecontinuationoftheNaxaliteuprisingthat
beganafewdecadesagointhatcountry.Nowthisrevolutionarywar
hasspreadacrossthevastandpopulouscountryanddirectlyaffects
thelivesofhundredsofmillionsofIndianmasses,themartyrdomof
comradeAzad,asoneofthecentralandtopleadersofthemovement
isconsideredanimportantsuccessforthereactionaryandatrocious
Indian armed forces. But, among the hundreds of millions of the
revolutionaryIndianmasses,therearemanymore`Azads'andmany
other`Azads'willjointhebattle.Thepeople'swarinIndiacanand
shouldsuccessfullyovercomethislossandcontinueaheaduntilthe
total victory of the revolution. Communist (Maoist) Party of
Afghanistanonthepathofstruggleforstartingthepeopleswarin
Afghanistan,whosespecificcharacteratthecurrentjunctureisthe
people's revolutionary national war of resistance against the
imperialist occupiers and their puppet regime will commemorate
comradeAzadandexpressesitssolidaritywithCPI(Maoist)andthe
peopleswarinthatcountryontheoccasionofthisloss.

479] Adocumentatpageno.117ofExh.267isapressrelease
ofCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist),CentralCommitteebyAzad,
Spokesperson, Central Committee CPI (Maoist) has written Red
SalutestoMaoistLeaderscomradesSkhamuriAppaRao(Ravi)and
KondalReddy(Ramana)and furthersuggestedtotakerevengefor
the deathofleadersofCPI(Maoist)fromtheGovernment andto
builtcountrywidewaveofpeople'sstruggletosweepawaythefascist
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
357 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

regimeledbyleadersofIndianGovernment.Itisallegedinthesaid
letterthatthecoldbloodedmurdersofMaoistleadersareanintegral
partoftheunprecedentedfascistoffensiveunleashedbytheCentral
and State Government against the CPI (Maoist) in the name of
operationGreenHunt.

480] In the document at page no.119 of Exh.267 taken out

from the harddisk Exh.4 having path Exh.4/OLD EHD/OLD/All
12345 titled as Maoist Strategy in India with Sub title An
interviewwithG.N.Saibaba,itismentionedthataccusedno.6G.N.
Saibaba is the deputy secretary of the Revolutionary Democratic
Front, an all Indian Federation of revolutionary organizations and
further stated that the Maoist are following the new democratic
method proved by China under the leadership of Mao that the
revolutionarymovementsmustputpriorityonworkingintheareas
where the State is weak. The Maoists are following the new
democratic method proved by China under the leadership of Mao,
thattherevolutionarymovementsmustputpriorityonworkinginthe
areaswherethestateisweak. TheMaoistsworkinthebackward
regionstosmashthelocalgovernmentandestablishpeople'spower.
Theybuildbasesinthesebackwardareas. Thisdoesn'tmeanthat
theydon'talsoworkinthecities. Infact,inthepartycongressin
January/February 2007 they decided to increase their work in the
ubranareas.Theyhaveproducedanewdocumentconcerningwork
intheurbanareasthatanalysestheworkdonethelastthirtyyears.
This document sets out a strategy for developing the work in the
urbanareas.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
358 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

481] It is further mentioned in the said document that The

Maoistsdoworkintheurbanareasamongtheworkingclassesand
the middle classes. This has secondary importance. The primary
importance is to capture the villages first and develop the armed
strugglewithpeasantsasthemainforceandwiththeworkingclass
astheleadership.Thismeansnotjustthephysicalworkersbutthose
ofthepeoplethathavetheproletarianideologyandwithoutproperly
oftheirownMaoistsdocombinelegalandtheillegalstrugglesasfar
asthereisspaceinlegalmeansavailable.Whateverlittlelegalspace
there is, it's being used to the maximum extent possible. But the
ruling classes don't allow thee use legal means and different
institutionsofdemocracy. Participatinginelectionsisnottheonly
way to participate in legal and urban spaces. Even boycotting
elections is a highly political activity, which is another way of
participatingpoliticallywithinthegivendemocraticspacethatexists
inIndia.FirstofalltheMaoistsareconcentratingongainingpower
forthepeopletobuildpeople'sdemocraticrevolutionaryinstitutions.
Whenthisisachievedinlargeareastheywillgetmorespaceinthe
urbancentresandinstitutions.

482] It is further mentionedin the saiddocument in Note 2

thatthefollowingisacloserdescriptionofthecommunistmovement
inIndiatodayaccordingtoaccusedno.6Saibabaandtherearethree
differentmainstreamsoftherevolutionarymovementlike(a)CPM
maoistpeopleswar(b) Cpi(ml)naxalbari,ctandothersarealso
MaoistandclosetotheMaoists.AlsoCPRCML,RedFlag,Communist
Revolutionary Platform, CCICP(ml), CPI(ml)central team, CPM
(ml)newdemocracy.Theseareallsmall,buttheyhaveamassbase.
Theypartakeinmassstrugglesbutdonotfollowacorrecttrack.They
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
359 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

followarightdeviationistline.CP(ml)liberationisnowfastturningto
revisionism,afairlylargeparty.Therearenoleftrevisionistgroups
remaining. There used to be Lin Biao groups, they hardly exist
anymore.

483] Itisfurthermentionedinthesaiddocumentthatthelast
streami.e.(c)oftherevolutionarymovementismentionedinabove
document is that Communist League(ml) split from the CPI(ml)
originallyinthe1970s.TheybelievethatIndiaiscapitalist.Theysplit
intofivedifferentgroups.Theyareverysmall.Theyworkinurban
areas.Theyarepettybourgeois.Theyconstituteademocraticvoicein
thecountrytoday.Theyvoicetheurbandemocraticintellectuals.

484] A photograph at page no.144 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.5/C/All photos/photo sai/New folder 1/File038 headed by
Krantikari Janwadi Morcha in which there appears programme
andinthatphotographaccusedno.3HemMishraisstandingonthe
stageaddressingtopeopleandaccusedSaibabaisappearing atthe
rightsideofthestage.FurtheroneprintoutofphotographofPublic
Meeting,thereisaccusedSaibabaaddressingtopeople.Furtherthe
accusedSaibabaisappearinginanotherprintoutinoneprogramme
underthebannerofConventionAgainstWaronPeople.

485] From document at page nos.170 of Exh.267 taken out

fromtheharddiscExh.4havingpathExh.4/OTHERS,itisclearthat
itisaPressstatementofCOMMUNISTPARTYOFINDIA(MAOIST)
CENTRALCOMMITTEENorthRegionalBureau datedJune32011
issuedbyGudsaUsendiSpokesperson, DandkaranyaSpecialZonal
CommitteeCPI(Maoist).Inthisdocumentitisstatedatpageno.171
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
360 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

and172OPPOSETHEARMYDEPLOYMENTINBASTAR!TALKOF
TRAINING IS NOTHING BUT A PLOY TO DECEIT THE PEOPLE!
GIVINGPOWERSTOTHEARMYTOATTACKINTHEPRETEXTOF
SELFDEFENSEISNOTHINGBUTFREEHANDFORMASSACRES
ANDATROCITIESONADIVASIS!FollowedbydetailedPressRelease.
ItisfurthermentionedthatOurSpecialZonalCommitteeappealsto
all democrats, human rights organizations, antidisplacement
movements, Adivasis organizations, and wellwishers of Adivasis,
intellectuals,writers,Artistesandmediapersonstoraisetheirvoice
againstsettingupofArmytrainingschoolsinBastarandtheproposed
huge land grab meant for this purpose. Come forward to build
agitations with the slogan Indian Army, Go back from Bastar.
Oppose the deployment of the Army in the ongoing war against
people in the name oftrainingschools.Demandtoscrapallthose
MoUssignedbythegovernmentofChhattisgarhwithbigcorporate
housesandallthoseprojectsofforcefullandacquisition.

486] Adocumentatpageno.172ofExh.267 takenoutfrom

the hard disc Exh.4 having path Exh.4/OTHERS, is press release
titled as Communist Party of India (Maoist) dated June 4, 2011
issuedbyAbhaySpokesperson,CentralCommittee,CPI(Maoist).In
thisdocumentitisstatedatpageno.173and174thatDeploymentOf
Army In the name of Training Schools Puts The Very Existence
AboriginesandInhabitantsofBastarInPeril!,ForestBelongsToThe
IndigenousPeople(Mulvasis) TheGovernmentDoesntHaveAny
RightOverEvenAInchOfIt!,IndianArmyGOBACKDoNotKill
YourOwnCitizens!followedbydetailedpressrelease. Fromthis
document it reveals that the Central Committee CPI (Maoist)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
361 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

appealed to the banned organisations particularly the Aadiwasi

OrganisationinIndiatoraisevoiceagainstdeploymentofArmyin
centralandeasternIndia.FromthisdocumentitrevealsthatCentral
Committee of CPI (Maoist) calls upon people of Bastar and
ChhatisgarhtofightagainsttheIndianarmyastheyarebackingthe
policeandparamilitary.

487] Inaletteratpageno.174ofExh.267takenoutfromthe
harddiskExh.4havingpath Exh.4/latest/haidear,writtentoHai
dearbyAmani,itismentionedthatHaidear,Howareyou?Howis
yourhealth?TwodaysbackIaminastrugglingsituation.Ifaceda
lotofstrugglebecauseIamintheturningpoint.ElsewhileItooka
decisionaboutManjeera. Iamnotspendtoseeher. Becausemy
work is changed and a lot of work to do. It is difficult to do
implement the decision earlier we both of them took a lot of
discussion is going here in that there is noquestion to see her in
whichplace?/where?themainquestioniswhyyouareseeing?prs
theydon'thaveanyfamiliesorfamilyattachments.Ifyouwanttodo
work like pm (part time) then you take Mj. If you continue this
positionyoumustdon'thaveanyfamilyrelations.Anyfamilyrelation
donot use to the movement are cut it don't continue with them
(parents also). Further take correct decision then our Cmeet is
possible. Ifyouwanttodiscusswithsaitaketimeandtellbetteris
youtakeyourowndecisionaboutMJ. PersonalproblemisPolitical
politiciseyourproblem. HowmanychildrenareinIndiafacethis
problem? We are doing nothing abroad your thinking and take
decisionabout34hoursonlywediscussedMjissuethereisnooption
youwanttotakecareaboutMJwethinktocontinuedthisCmeet?no
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
362 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Cmetshallpostponed. Furthermostoftheremainingcontentsisin
Englishscriptandinsomeotherlanguage. Fromthisdocumentit
revealsthatAmaniwhoiswifeofaccusedno.6Saibabahaswritten
saidlettertoaccusedno.6Saibabainwhichproblemsfacedbytheir
daughterManjeerawerediscussed.

488] Adocumentatpageno.175ofExh.267havingpath Ex
4/cy47513ex4/c/OTHERS isaPressReleaseofCommunistParty
ofIndia(Maoist),DandakaranyaSpecialZonalCommitteetitledas
Oppose The Raoghat Railway Line And The Mining Project
Which Would Derail The Very Existence Of Bastariya People!
ClaimOfSavingBhilaiSteelPlantisNothingButTrickeryEnsuring
the Plunder of Bastar's Wealth By Multi National Companies is
Reality!!. In this document it is mentioned that local people of
Bastar were opposing the project because of destroy of forest and
largeportionofadjoiningforestwouldalsobedestroyedduetothis
project.ItisfurthermentionedthattheSpecialZonalCommitteeof
CommunistPartyofIndiacallsuponalltheworkersandfarmersof
ChhatisgarhtodemandtheclosureofRaoghatProjectandtooppose
theArmyDevelopmentinBastartosuppresstheirjuststruggle.This
documentshowsaccusedwasopposingGovernmentactions.

489] Adocumentatpageno.177ofExh.267havingpath Ex
4/C/oct2010/Talks dated 31st May 2010 written by Azad,
spokesperson,CentralCommittee,CPI(Maoist),Indiaregardingthe
proposalfortalksbyMr.P.ChidambaramtoSwamiAgniveshinwhich
itismentionedthatCPI(Maoist),Indiadesirespeacesincerelyinthe
interestsofthelakhsofadivasiswhoarebeingcruellycrushedunder
thejackbootsoftheforcessentbytheIndianStateandthepeopleof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
363 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ourcountryatlarge.However,toensuretheestablishmentofpeace
there should be ceasefire or cessation of hostilities by both sides
simultaneouslyinsteadofaskingonesidetoabjureviolence.Ifthe
governmentisreallyseriousaboutreducinglevelsofviolencethenit
shouldimmediatelyliftthebanonthepartyandmassorganisations
so as to facilitate them to take up open forms of struggle. If the
governmentisseriousaboutholdingtalksitshouldinitiatemeasures
to release Party leaders as a prelude to the release of political
prisonersandmostimportantly,itshouldstopallitseffortstoescalate
the war including the measure of calling back all the paramilitary
forcesdeployedinthewarzones.

490] A letter at page no.180 of Exh.267 having path Ex

4/C/oct2010/talksaddressedtoDearSwamiAgniveshjibyShrikant,
amemberofCentralCommittee,CPI(Maoist)dated3rdAugustin
which allegations were made against P.Chidambaram, the then
FinanceMinisterofIndiathatsocalledeffortsbyCPI(Maoist)are
torpedoedbyChidambaramwithhisdirtytricksbykillingcom.Azad
andhereferredP.ChidambarmasHitler.

491] Adocumentatpageno.182ofExh.267havingpath Ex
4/C/Alloldandnew/othersisaletterwrittenbySwamiAgniveshto
The Central Committee Leadership, Communist Party of India
(Maoist)inwhichheaskedtopayrealhomagetoMr.Azadwhich
wouldbethecontinuationofthepeaceprocessandfurtherappealed
toleadersofCPI(Maoist)todiscussandarriveatadateformutual
ceasefire.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
364 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

492] Fromthedocumentatpagenos.183ofExh.267takenout
fromtheharddiscExh.4havingpathExh.4/onAzad/Statementon
AzadKillingbyCPI(Maoist),itisclearthatitisapressstatement
dated3rd July2010titledas CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist),
Central Committee North Regional Bureau wherein it is
mentionedthatItisnotanencounteratall!!Itisacoldblooded
murderbyAPPolice!!RedSalutetoMartyrscom.Azad(Cherukuri
Rajkumar) and com. Hem Pandey (Jitender)!! Let us avenge the
killingofthebelovedcomradesbythekhakicladfascistgangsofAP
government!!Followedbydetailedpressstatement.

493] A document at page no.186 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/OTHERS is a Press Release of Communist Party of India
(Maoist)CentralCommitteewithaheading,Throwintothedust
binall theviciouspropaganda carriedon by therulingclasses
and corporate media against the Maoist leadership! In this
documenttheSpokespersonAbhay,CentralCommitteeCPI(Maoist)
made allegations against the State Government that the faithful
servantoftheimperialistsandthePrimeMinisterofIndiaManmohan
SinghbegandescribingtheMaoistmovementasthebiggestinternal
securitythreatafterthishistoricunity.Itisalsoanundeniablefact
that the ruling classes have intensified their fascist offensive on
massivescaleagainsttherevolutionarymovementonlyafterthisand
lastlyappealedtotheoppressedpeopleoftheworldandourcountry,
democrats and revolutionary ranks to condemn this vicious
propaganda,tostayalerttosuchtricksofthestate,tothrowthem
intothedustbinandtostandfirmlywiththerevolutionarymovement
insolidarity.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
365 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

494] A document at page no.188 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/311212/Rdf Conference Material/Day 2 of first RDF
Conference is Minutes and Proceedings of Day 2 of First RDF
Conference, reveals that accused no.6 Saibaba had attended the
said conference of RDF organisation and he conducted the said
conference and in this conference the resolutions of publication of
severalbookscontainingMaoistliteraturewerepassedanddiscussed
aboutthesolidaritytoRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)toend
greenhuntoperationandtoremovethearmy.Atpageno.196ofthe
saiddocumentthereferenceofAbuzmadinGadchirolidistrictwas
madeanditismentionedinthesaiddocumentthatAbuzmadwasan
areainwhichtherewasnoadministrationandarmyisbeingsentto
combat Maoist. On perusal of confessional statements of accused
no.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotewhichiscorroboratedby
theevidenceofP.W.9RajuPoriyaitrevealsthataccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirkiandno.2PanduNaroteweretakingaccusedno.3HemMishrato
theforestofAbuzmadinGadchirolidistricttomeettheunderground
naxal leader and lady naxal leader Narmadakka but they were
arrestedatAheriBusStand.

495] Inaletteratpageno.200ofExh.267takenoutfromthe
harddisk Exh.4 having path Exh.4/new folder/teacher responce,
addressed to The Home Minister, Ministry of Home Affairs
GovernmentofIndiaNewDelhi110001dated4August2013,itis
clearly mentioned that Sir, This is with reference to the report
titled,DUkaProfessorSurakshaAgenceyonkeNishaneparbyNiloo
Ranjan,intheDainikJagranof1August2013.We,theundersigned
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
366 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(teachersofDelhiUniversity,JawaharlalNehruUniversityandJamia
MiliaIslamiaUniversity)aredeeplyshockedatthecasualandcallous
mannerinwhichthesaidreporthasleveledoutrageousallegations
againstaseniroandrespectedcolleague,Dr.G.N.Saibaba,Asst.Prof.
inEnglishatRamLalAnandCollege,DelhiUniversity.Anewspaper
ofthestandingandexperienceofDainikJagaranshouldhaveatleast
observedtheminimaljournalisticethicofconfirmingtheseallegations
withDr.Saibaba,beforepublishingthem.Dr.Saibabahasexpressly
statedthatheneitherknows,nowknowsofanyonebythenameof
MaheshSaikia,whosestatementstothepoliceallegedlyidentifyDr.
SaibabaasamemberoftheStateCommitteeoftheCPI(Maoist).He
hasalsocategoricallydeniedbeingamemberofanyStateCommittee
oftheCPI(Maoist). Furtherbesidesbeingarespectedteacherand
academic,Dr.Saibabahasinsistentlyandconsistentlyraisedhisvoice
againstthemilitaryoffensivethathasbeeninitiatedagainstthetribal
populationsofIndia,aswellasonahostofotherissues.Furtherwe,
the undersigned, strongly condemn such measures, whether
undertakenbythestateofbypurportedlyindependentmediahouses
likeDainakJagaran,withorwithouttheconnivanceofthestate.We
stand in complete solidarity with our colleague, Dr. G.N. Saibaba,
against the groundles and unprovoked defamatin that this news
reporthascarriedout.Wewishtorecordourprotestinthestrongest
termstothetargetingofDr.Saibabainthismanner,anddemandthat
DainikJagaranshouldissueanunconditionalapolotyforthereport,
andretractitimmediately. Andwedemandthatyou,astheHome
Ministerofthiscountry,controltheunrulyintelligenceagencieswho
aretryingtospreadgossipandrumourswithanintentiontothreaten
thefreedomofspeechandcriticaldissentofindividualsinthename
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
367 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ofwaragainstterror. Pleasedoaddhereyourname,institutional
affiliationandotherdetailsandsendyourconsenttobeasignatoryof
this representation. From this letter it reveals that this letter is
writtenbyaccusedno.6SaibabatoHomeMinisterpretendingthatit
waswrittenbytheprofessorsofDelhiUniversitywhereaccusedno.6
SaibabawasworkingasProfessorfordenyingtheallegationslevelled
againsthimtobeaMemberofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist).

496] Inaletteratpageno.203ofExh.267takenoutfromthe
harddiskExh.4havingpath Exh.4/leafletSujitBasu, addressedto
Dear Tara Prakash sent by Saibaba, it is clearly mentioned that
DearTaraPrakash,IunderstandthatSambhavanaisnotaMarxist
disabled teachers' organisation. Organisations like Sambhavana
shouldincludealldisabledteachersirrespectiveofwhatphilosophy
they believe in and Sambhavana is rightly doing so. I have no
disagreementwithyouinthisunderstanding.Butdiscussionsonall
ideological positions can take place in an organisation like
Sambhavanasothatindividualmemberstaketheirowndecisionsand
willfeelfreetoexpressthemselves. Furthertherulingclassesand
their governments always portray the fighting people and their
movementsascreatinganarchyandchaoswithaviewtosuppress
them.Iamcompletelyinfavourofdestabillsingtheauthorityofthe
exploitativeauthoritieswhooppresswithruleofthumb.Theruling
classescalltheantiestablishmentmovementsasanarchist. Thatis
completely different from what I have discussed in my earlier
response.Theindividualswhoadvocatefornonpartisanpolitics,the
socalledindependentorganisationswithoutexternalaffiliationand
stand against party politics ultimately turn against organised
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
368 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

resistanceoftheoppressedandmarginalisedsufferingpeople.Thisis
thehistoricaltruth. Fromthisdocumentitrevealsthatthisletter
was written by accused no.6 Saibaba to one Tara Prakash stating
therein that to do concrete work not only disabled teachers'
organizationbutalsosuggestedtodotheworkaboutthedeployment
ofIndianArmyagainstAadivasisinChhattisgarh.

497] In the document at page no.205 of Exh.267 taken out

from the harddisk Exh.4 having path Exh.4/All other/I feel
demoralised to act on any issue, a letter dated 17 June 2003
addressedto ComradebyPrakash inwhichitismentionedthatI
feel demoralised to work. I ampsychologicallyexhaustedandit is
because of my restricted movements I am discriminated against,
though unwillingly for the UG interactions and strangely again, I
provedtobemoremobilethananyoneintheentirecountryasfar
themassorganizationsareconcernednotonlyintermsofquantityof
workbutalsoqualitativelyandhowever,myphysicaldisabilityhas
becomemypoliticalAchillesHeelwithregardtomyproximitywith
party committees, which should not have been the case with a
revolutionary party. This letter shows that 'Prakash' is accused
no.6Saibaba.

498] ItisfurthermentionedinthesaidletterthatasIhave
beenfacinginhumandiscriminationinthesociallyoppressivesociety
I was born into since my childhood, I felt liberated in the
revolutionarycirclesandmassesofourpartyinfluence.Fromthis
documentitrevealsthatthesaiddocumentwaswrittenbyaccused
no.6SaibababyusinganothernameasPrakash.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
369 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

499] Inaletteratpageno.206ofExh.267takenoutfromthe
harddiskExh.4havingpathExh.4/Data/personal/To,withtitleTO
written to Secretary SubCommittee on Mass Organization
(SUCOMO) CPI (Maoist) written by Prakash dated 2 December
2006,itismentionedthatDearComrade,Ihavebeenservingonthe
all India Fraction Committee under the Subcommittee on Mass
Organization(SUCOMO)undertheCentralCommitteeoftheParty
since1996.Iamdeeplypaintedbythetreatmentmetedouttowards
mebysomecomradesalltheseyears. NowIfindmyselfinamore
aggravatedsituation. Iamnotinapsychologicalconditiontobear
thesituation. Myhealthisalsonotcooperatingtofacethepresent
aggressive attitude of these comrades towards me. Therefore, I
herebysubmitmyresignationtomyprimarymembershipoftheparty
andtotheFractionCommittee.Ialsoresignfromallthecommittees
oftheMassFrontswhereverIamamember.However,Iwouldliketo
state here that I have no differences with the basic political and
ideologicallineoftheParty. IremainasupporterofthePartyand
servethemovementinwhateverlittlewaypossibletome.Iofferm
apologyfortakingthisdecisionatatimewhenIshouldhavebeen
doing more quality work in building the mass work I have been
entrustedwithbytheParty. MydecisionofresignationtotheParty
membershipandallMassFrontsisfinalandnonnegotiable. Iwill
soonsubmitadetailedletterofresignation. Thisshowsthatitisa
resignationletterbyaccusedno.6Saibaba...

500] AdocumentatPageno.208ofExh.267havingpath Ex
4/Cy47513Ex4/c/All other is a letter addressed to Dear
Comrades by Prakash (i.e. accused no.6 Saibaba) in which it is
mentioned that A decade of work in the mass front has been
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
370 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

completedforme. NowIfeelImaybegivenworkinthedirectPt
frontthatdemandstogoundergroundforwhichIamprepared.If
myhandicapnessisunsuitableforsuchwork,Iampreparedforany
jobentrustedbythePt.Insuchacase,myfieldmaybechangedto
thatofcivilrightswork.OnlyincaseIwillnotfitforUGwork.But
inmanagerialandlisioningwork.IalsodevelopedafeelingthatIam
condemned to stay in Delhi as long as I am in A3 in the present
circumstances.Iamforcedtothinkbythecircumstantialconditions
thatnobreakthroughispossibleatpresentinA3. Ithasdeveloped
someinnatequalitiesofinertness.Amajoreventualityisneededto
changethesituationthatmayevenrequireatotalchange. Idonot
wanttowasteanymoretimeinmycadrelifeonthis. Fromthis
documentitrevealsthatthesaiddocumentwaswrittenbyaccused
SaibababyusinganothernameasPrakash.

501] The document at page no.210 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/311212/Rdf Conference Press note final Day2 taken out
from the harddisk Exh.4 having path Exh.4/8 Oct 2012/RDF
ConferenceMaterial/RDFConferencePressNoteDay2, titledas
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront (RDF),isa Press Release dated
23rdApril2012abouttheConferenceheldatHyderabad,Telangana
whichwaswrittenbyaccusedno.6 Saibaba,anditisstatedtherein
thatG.N.Saibaba,theDeputySecretaryofRDF,aBhumaiahofthe
Telangana Praja Front (TPF), alongwith Varavara Rao revolunary
poet and Lenin Kumar, editor of Odiya cultural magazine Nishan,
Jharkhand'sSharmilaofNariMuktiSanghandothersaddressedthe
delegates of the RDF conference on its first day and it is further
mentionedinthesaiddocumentthatAnewAllIndiaCommitteehas
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
371 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

been elected by the Conference consisting of eighteen executive

members from 13 states and it is further mentioned in the said
documentthatthefirstconferenceofRDFsuccessfullyconcludedwith
theresolvetocarryforwarditsstatedgoalsofmobilisingthepeople
forstrugglesinthetimestocome.

502] Fromthedocumentatpageno.213ofExh.267takenout
from the harddisk Exh.4 having path Exh.4/Nepal/copy of
matter.zip.sda/matter/disenwithBrt,itrevealsthatitisregarding
discussionwithBiratGrp.Sept.2010andfurtherstatedthatEven
police force has advanced weapons compared to Nepal. So
sophisticated weapons neededtofight against despotismandmust
face IndoBhutan mercenaries. Regional, national, sociocultural,
linguisticmultiplicitymuchmorecomplexofNepal.

Personaldocumentsofaccusedno.6Saibabawasfoundinthe
electronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)seizedfromthehousesearchof
accusedno.6Saibaba.

503] Somepersonaldocumentsarealsofoundintheelectronic
gadgets Arts.1 to 41 i.e. CDs, DVDs, Pendrives, harddisks seized
from the house search of accused no.6 Saibaba under seizure
panchanama(Exh.165)whichareasunder:

504] On perusal of document at Art.150 taken out from the

pendrive (Exh.23) seized from the house search of accused no.6
Saibaba under seizure panchanama (Exh.165) having path Exh

23/ALLL/AccommodationIssue/Letters/Representationbeforethe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
372 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

InquiryCommittee, itrevealsthatitisaletteraddressedtoProf.
Anandakrishnan,ChairmanInquiryCommittee anditismentioned
thereinasfollows
Lookingintotheallegationsinconnectionwiththe
recent selection of candidates to teaching post at
CIEFL, Hydrabad, by the University Grants
Commission 12th December 2006 wherein it is
stated,Iamaphysicallyhandicappedpersonwitha
severedeformity(90%).Bothmylowerlimbswere
affectedbypolioinmychildhood.Icannotstandor
walkonmyown. Imoveinawheelchair. Witha
greatdifficultyIcouldcomeuptothelevelofhigher
education.PresentlyIamalecturerinapermanent
position at Ram Lal Anand College, University of
Delhi. I am deeply interested in teaching and
studyingliteraryandculturalformsandpracticesof
oursociety.Iamengagedinteachingandresearch
in literary studies at the University of Delhi and
pursuingforaPhDdegreefromThedepartmentof
English,UniversityofDelhi.

505] OnperusalofadocumentatArt.151takenoutfromthe
pendrive (Exh.23) seized from the house search of accused no.6
Saibaba under seizure panchanama (Exh.165) having path letter/

documentExh23/ALLL/LetterreAdhocAppointment, itreveals
thatitisaletteraddressedtoTheprincipalRamLalAnandCollege
UniversityofDelhiBenitoJuarrejRoad,NewDelhi110021anditis
mentionedthereinasfollows
Wewouldliketobringtoyournoticeonceagain
that a good number of classes, including two
sections of Foundation Course, six sections of
Application Language course of FYUP and several
English Honours classes of Semester III and V
remained unassignged at the Department of
English.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
373 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

506] OnperusalofadocumentatArt.152takenoutfromthe
pendrive (Exh.23) seized from the house search of accused no.6
Saibaba under seizure panchanama (Exh.165) having path Exh

23/ALLL/LettertoNarayanaAcademy, itrevealsthatitisaletter
addressed to Mr. Santosh Kumar Mishra, Centre Head (Kingsway
Camp)2ndFloorMallRoad,NearGTBNagarMetroStation,Delhi,
anditismentionedthereinasfollows

My daughter, G. Manjeera (Admission No :

162:1801)joinedyourprogramETYCP2014inMay
2012. However, she could not cope up with the
course beyond September 2012 due to several
reasons. With your kind cooperation and
counselling we have tried to continue her in the
course and below the lette name of accused
Dr.G.N.Saibabaismentioned.

507] OnperusalofadocumentatArt.153takenoutfromthe
pendrive (Exh.23) seized from the house search of accused no.6
Saibaba under seizure panchanama (Exh.165) having path Exh

23/ALLL/All/LettertoSBI,itrevealsthatitisaletteraddressedThe
ManagerSBI,DelhiUniversityBranch, anditismentionedtherein
whichisreproducedasfollows
On 31 October a sum of Rs.5000/ was debited
frommysavingsaccount(No.30577065300)twice,
thoughIwithdrewonlyonce.Infacttherearefour
entriesonthesamedayinmypassbookandat
thelast,belowYourstrulynameofA.S.Vasantha
Kumariiswritten.

508] OnperusalofadocumentatArt.154takenoutfromthe
pendrive (Exh.23) seized from the house search of accused no.6
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
374 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Saibaba under seizure panchanama (Exh.165) having path Exh

23/ALLL/All/ResearchUnitforpoliticalEconomy,itrevealsthatit
is a letter addressed Girish Srnivasan Research Unit for Political
Economy,GroundFloor,SawantMarg,Colaba,Mumbai400005,and
itismentionedthereinwhichreproducedasfollows

509] Apologies for delay in sending the payment for

photocopyingandpostagecharges. DuetohecticscheduleIcould
not immediately send the cheque. and below the letter name of
accusedno.6G.N.Saibabaiswritten.

Documentsinrespectofforeignrelationsandcorrespondenceof
CPI(Maoist)IndiawithCPI(Maoist)ofothercountriesfoundin
theelectronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)seizedfromthehousesearch
ofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

510] Prosecutionreliedonthedocumentstakenoutfromthe
electronicgadgetsArts.1to41i.e.CDs,DVDs,Pendrives,harddisks
seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaunderseizure
panchanama (Exh.165) which are alongwith Exh.267 shows the
incriminatingmaterialinrespectofrelationsandcorrespondenceof
CPI(Maoist)IndiawithCPI(Maoist)ofothercountriesagainstthe
accusedwhichareasfollows:

511] From the letter dated 31 March2005at page no.13of

Exh.267takenoutfromtheharddiscExh.4havingpath Exh.4/All
other/lawyer'stourofsouthAsia, itisclearthatitwaswrittenTo
allchaptersandsupporterswhereinitismentionedtheStatements
of2ndInternationalDelegationtoSouthAsiaanditisstatedthatthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
375 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

main purpose of this delegation was to investigate the current

situation of the Nepali Revolutionary Leaders C. Prakash Gajurel
(known as Comrade Gaurav) and Mohan Baidhya (known as
Comrade Kiran) who are being held prisoner by the Indian
government.Itisfurtherstatedthatthedelegationalsocametothe
conclusion that the arrest, mistreatment and imprisonment of 19
NepalinationalsinPatna,whowerelegallyinIndiaatthetimeof
their arrest, is another politically motivated abuse of the rights of
theseprisoners. TheIndiangovernmentisalsochargingthemwith
seditionandincitingtowagewaragainstIndiabasedsolelyon
theirpoliticalviewsandtheiradmittedmembershipinorsupportfor
theCommunistPartyofNepal(Maoist).

512] A document at Page no.57 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/c/for said/working Directory 201/New Folder/final months
aftercorrection/Manjeera/coretitledasMeetingofCoreofA3/A4
onOct2ndand3rd2006containsvariousresolutionsregardingthe
suggestionsofdemandsforthecampaignofbuildingA3andA4,mass
movement,displacementmovementandfundsandbudgetsforthe
developmentofA3andA4committeesofbannedorganisationCPI
(Maoist)workinginvariousStatesofIndiaanditismentionedthat
Prakashi.e.accusedno.6Saibabaalongwithhiscompanionmusttake
serious attempts at consultation on all A4 FC decisions and other
matters concerning the organization. This document stating that
RegardingtheVicePresidentshipofA3,Josephwillcontinuetillthe
conferenceandPrakashwillbeaskedtotaketheresponsibilitydueto
hisgreaterroleinA3andfurtherstatedthat Prakashhasagreedto
takeontheresponsibilityofA3networkingthroughtheemailwith
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
376 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

internationalcontacts. InthisregardJosephwillhandoverallthe
contacts to him. From this letter it shows that international
responsibilitywasgiventoaccusedno.6Saibaba.

513] A document at page no.78 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/OLDEHD/OLD/All12345/ILPS/DearArman,Exh.267 isa
letteraddressedtoDearArmanwhereinitismentionedthatwhen
accusedno.6SaibabaisinLondon,HollandandBirminghamduring
theirdiscussionfollowingproposalsareagreed

Some representatives from India from antidisplacement

front, political prisoners and RDF, possibly anti caste
movementwilljoinILPSTIA.

An international team of ILPS to visit areas of anti

displacementmovementsinIndiainMarch2008tocome
outwithareportforinternationalpropaganda.Theteam
willalsotovisitChhattisgarhintheareaeffectedbySalwa
Judum, an area of indigenous people most serious
affected in a major way. Other important areas, among
others, would be Nandigram and Singur West Bengal,
Kalingnar, Jagatisgapur and Kashipur in Orissa, and
Jharkhand. The team needs to in India for at least 15
days.

Followed by the teams report, an International Public

HearingmaybeconductedassuggestedbyComradeJose
MariaSison,withinternationallyrenownedpeopleasjury
simultaneously from IndiaandLondon sessionsthrough
videoconferencing.Butasectionoftheinternationaljury
beablepresentinIndia.

ILPS to aid and promote the formation of international

SolidarityCommitteessupportingandtakinguptheissues
of Indian Antidisplacement movement particularly in
Europe and Americas to start with. The international
monopoly corporate houses that directly displace, kill,
maim,rapepeopleinIndiaaretobetargetedinabigway
throughcampaign.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
377 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ComradeVaravaraRaohasagreedtoparticipateinthe
TIA.500]

514] This document shows that there are some international

programmesofILPSorganisationandattheendoftheletteraccused
no.6Saibabahasinformedtocontactsomemembersattheendof
eachmailcontainedsothattheywillunderstandtheimportanceof
theorganisationandatthefootofthislettertheemailofaccused
no.6Saibabaisgiven.

515] A document at page no.81 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/All old and new/others/international/dear GNSaibaba is a
letter on the letter head of ATIK (Avrupa Turkiyeli Isciler
Konfedersasyonu), Turque and Europe addressed to accused no.6
G.N.SaibabafromChairpersonofInternationalRelationCommission
ATIKwhereinitismentionedthatsaidATIKlaunchedacampaignfor
thesolidaritywiththeIndianpeopleandpeople'smovementagainst
OperationGreenHunt(OGH)aschemeofIndianGovernmentand
invitedSeniorMaoistleadersfromIndiatoEuropeandalsotalkedto
TurkeyaboutthejoiningofMaoistleaders.Fromthisletteritreveals
thataccusedno.6SaibabaisanactivememberofCPI(Maoist)India
andheisincontactandhasrelationswithotherMaoistorganisations
workinginforeigncountries.

516] A document at page no.92 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/OLDEHD/All others 2/Arrange/Azad matter/Communist/
Movement containsmaterialagainst imperialism,againstmodern
fascism, struggle, organize and construct the party written by
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
378 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Communist Party MaoistItaly, France, Turkey North Kurdistan and

suggested that to install amid the rebel youth of the imperialist
banlieues, constructing youth revolutionary organisms and to give
support and orientation to the student struggles, immigrants,
lodgement occupants, to the popular struggles on the territories
against military bases. Strengthen and expand women's struggle,
constructing a revolutionary proletarian feminist movement. To
struggle against repression, in developing campaigns and Red Aid
organisms.Ontheinternationalleveltosupport allantiimperialist
strugglesandpeoples'warsandfurthersuggestedtocontributetoa
newunityamongcommunistpartiesonthebasisontheproletarian
internationalism,theassertionofMarxismLeninismMaoism,thepath
torevolution. AttheendofletterthereismentionofCommunist
PartyMaoistItaly,CommunistPartyMaoistFrance,Communist
PartyMaoistTurkeyNorthKurdistan.

517] A document at Page no.114 of Exh.267 is an article

published by Communist (Maoist) Party of Afghanistan on the
occasionofMartyrdomofComradeAzad,aMaoistLeaderofIndia.
Thecontentsofthesaiddocumentarereproducedasunder:
OntheOccasionofMartyrdomofComradeAzad
Expressing solidarity with Communist Party of
India(Maoist)

Comrade Azad, spokesperson for Communist Party

ofIndia(Maoist),wasmurderedonJuly1st2010.
Letushonourhismemoryandcontinueonhispath!
ComradeAzadwasamemberofcentralcommittee
and also a member of the politbureau of the
CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist).Hisdeathisa
biglossfortheCPI(Maoist),theIndianrevolution,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
379 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

the revolutions of the region, and also the global

revolution.Hewouldhaveplayedaverycriticaland
decisiveroleatthecurrentjuncture:atatimewhen
the reactionary Indian state on one hand has
mobilizedmorethan250000policeandmercenary
forces against the Maoist peoples war within the
framework of a large military campaign called
OperationGreenHunt,andontheotherhanditis
espousing a deceptive propaganda about "peace
talks" and "ceasefire." His murder at the hands of
Andra Pardesh's special forces, and that even in
anotherstate,whichisevenillegalunderthelawsof
the Indian state, illustrates the fact that the
reactionary state is using the false propaganda
around"ceasefire"and"peacetalks"asafaadefor
hidingitsantipeoplebrutalrepressionandforthis
purposetheywouldevenbreaktheirownlaws.The
resistanceofthemassesundertheleadershipofCPI
(Maoist) against "Operation Green Hunt" that
spreadsacrosstwentystatesoutof28Indianstates
isaresistanceagainstthecompradorpoliciesofthe
reactionary Indian state which is making possible
thevastplunderandpillageofthenaturalresources
of India by multinational corporations. In the
process of the ongoing resistance, which
continuously expands and spreads, the masses of
people areselflesslygivingsacrificesandalsogive
toughblowstotheviciousandrepressiveforcesof
thereactionarystate.Theofficialsofthereactionary
Indian state and at its helm the Prime Minister,
Manmohan Singh, since the last few years is
continuouslydeclaringthattheMaoistpeopleswar
is the biggest threat to the Indian state.
Thearmedstruggleandthecurrentpeopleswarin
India that is being led by CPI (Maoist) is the
continuation oftheNaxaliteuprisingthatbegana
few decades ago in that country. Now this
revolutionary war has spread across the vast and
populous country and directly affects the lives of
hundreds of millions of Indian masses, the
martyrdomofcomradeAzad,asoneofthecentral
andtopleadersofthemovementisconsideredan
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
380 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

importantsuccessforthereactionaryandatrocious
Indian armed forces. But, among the hundreds of
millions of the revolutionary Indian masses, there
aremanymore`Azads'andmanyother`Azads'will
join the battle. The people's war in Indiacan and
shouldsuccessfullyovercomethislossandcontinue
ahead until the total victory of the revolution.
Communist (Maoist) Party of Afghanistan on the
path of struggle for starting the peoples war in
Afghanistan,whosespecificcharacteratthecurrent
junctureisthepeople'srevolutionarynationalwarof
resistanceagainsttheimperialistoccupiersandtheir
puppet regime will commemorate comrade Azad
and expresses its solidarity with CPI (Maoist) and
thepeopleswarinthatcountryontheoccasionof
thisloss.

Communist (Maoist) Party of Afghanistan

July15,2010

518] A document at page no.136 of Exh.267 titled as

PrabhathamwillnotdieshowsthatthegenocideinSriLankaon
Tamils is the continuation of aggression on the fighting people of
Pelestine,AfghanistanandIraqanditisallegedthatthisgenocideon
the Eelam struggle under the leadership of V Prabhakaran was
supportedbyIndianGovernment.

519] AdocumentatPageno.137ofExh.267undertheheadof
Office of the Prime Minister Transnational Government of Tamil
Eelam,875,AvenueoftheAmericas,Suite1001,NewYork,NY1001,
USA,dated19February2011titledasWesharethisJoyfulmoment
withthepeopleofEgypt!.

520] AdocumentatPageno.139ofExh.267undertheheadof
Office of the Prime Minister Transnational Government of Tamil
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
381 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Eelam,875,AvenueoftheAmericas,Suite1001,NewYork,NY1001,
USA, dated 8 March 2011 titled as Vehement condemnation of
Despicable Attack on Member of Parliament Sivagunanam in Sri
Lanka!.

521] AdocumentatPageno.224ofExh.267havingpath Ex
4/C/Ritu13March/mydocuments/openletter.finalJul.A09 isa
openlettertoUnitedCommunistPartyofNepal(Maoist)fromthe
Communist Party of India (Maoist) addressed to dear Comrade
writtenbyCentralCommitteeCPI(Maoist),Indiadated20July,2009
andonperusalofsaidletteritrevealsthattherewererelationsin
betweenCPI(Maoist),IndiaandUnitedCommunistPartyofNepal
(Maoist). Tothateffectitismentionedthat inthenameofthe
struggleagainstdogmatism,therehavebeenseriousdeviations
in the International Communist Movement (ICM), often going
into an even greater, and more dangerous, abyss of right
deviationandrevisionism.Inthenameofcreativeapplicationof
Marxism, communist parties have fallen into the trap of right
opportunism, bourgeois pluralist EuroCommunism, rabid anti
Stalinism, anarchist postmodernism and outright revisionism.
RightdangerorrevisionismintheICMhasemergedasthegreatest
dangerintheperiodfollowingtheusurpationoftheleadershipofthe
CPSU and state power in the Soviet Union after the demise of
comradeStalin.ComMaoandothergenuinerevolutionarieshadto
wage a consistent ideologicalpolitical struggle against revisionism
andreformismintheICMandalsowithintheCPC.However,despite
the great struggle waged by com Mao and other Marxist Leninist
revolutionariesallovertheworldagainstrevisionism,ithasbeenthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
382 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

revisionistswhohavetemporarilywonanddominatedtheICMinthe
contemporaryworld.Theideologicalpoliticaldebateoverthecreative
applicationofMLMtotheconcretepracticeoftherevolutioninNepal
hastobeconductedwithacorrectgraspofthisinternationalstruggle
ever since the time ofcom Lenin,andparticularlybyMaoagainst
Khrushchevrevisionism.

522] FurtherCPI(Maoist)Indiasuggestedtoconductadebate
withintheMaoistcampsworldwideandtothateffectitismentioned
inthesaidletterthatWearesendingthisOpenLettertoyourParty
soastoconductapolemicaldebatebothwithinyourPartyandthe
Maoist revolutionary camp worldwide. This step has become
necessarybecauseoftheveryseriousdevelopmentsthathavetaken
placeinthecourseofdevelopmentoftherevolutioninNepalthat
haveabearingonourunderstandingofimperialismandproletarian
revolution as well as the strategytactics to be pursued by Maoist
revolutionaries in the contemporary world; there is also serious
deviationfromtheideologyofMLM.Hencethesearenomorethe
internalmattersconcerningyourPartyalone.

523] Further there is mention of Naxalbari in the said open

letterbyCPI(Maoist)IndiatotheComradesofCPI(Maoist)from
othercountries.

IncriminatingdocumentsfoundinelectronicgadgetsArts.1to41
seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6SaibabaatArticles
147to164.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
383 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

524] Article 147 having Exh23/ALLL/Accommodation

issues/Letters/lettertoSaibabaisaletteraddressedtoaccusedno.6
Saibaba by Surendra Mohan in which it is mentioned that said
SurendraMohan cannotbepartoftheCPI(Maoist)program,ashe
neversubscribedtoviolentresistanceandhewastakinginitiativefor
peacewhichbetweentheGovernmentandtheMaoistsandhewas
proposing violence on both sides should come to an end. The
contentsofthisletterclearlyshowsthatCPI(Maoist)waspromoting
theactivitiesofviolenceandhencehewasnotreadytoworkwithCPI
(Maoist).

525] Article 148 having path Exh23/ALL123/college

/Kuttyletters/open letter of Kutti is a open letter addressed to
SabyasachiPandawhereinitismentionedthat,Iwasincentraljail
(Hydrabad) along with Modem Balakrishna (Central Committee
Member) and Sakhamuri Appa Rao (martyr) in the same barrack.
Balakrishna and Appa Rao underwent more than ten years in jail.
Balakrishna was my guide and teacher. I am a Keralite born and
broughtupinTamilnaduandstudiedTamil(can'treadandwritemy
mother tongue that is Malayalam). Balakrishna used to share his
experiencesoftheGuerillaArmyoftheerstwhileCPI(ML)(People's
War). GuerillaArmyfighterswon'tgetchickenbiriyanidaily. They
getwhateverfoodthepeopleoffer.Thatisrice,mirch,tamarindand
salt.Withthattheyhavetomanage.

526] Article 149 having path Exh 23/ALL123/ college/RLA

Work Load/Tactics of intimidation by Jharkhand Govt. to
dissuadefuturefactisadocumentdated29thMay2013mentioning
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
384 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

tactics of intimidation by the Zarkhand Government wherein it is

stated that, We strongly condemn the absolutely arbitrary and
unprecedented action of the Jharkhand police administration in
detaining eight members of a CDRO (Coordination of Democratic
RightsOrganizations)factfindingteamwhiletheywereaddressinga
pressconferenceinRanchi. Theteamhadjustreturnedfromafact
findingmissiontoChatra,wheretenmembersoftheCPI(Maoist)
had been supposedly killed in a long gun battle with the TPC, a
splintergroupactivelysupportedbythestategovernment,inMarch
2013.

527] A document atArt.155havingpath ex.4/31.12.12/rdf

pdfi/resolution/EC Meeting decisions delhi titled as,
Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) All India EC Meeting 8
and9thMay2007,Delhi. Fromthesaiddocumentitrevealsthat
there are shortforms of namesof some personswho attendedthe
saidmeetingandthenameofaccusedno.6Saibabaismentionedas
SBandinthesaidmeetinghomagewaspaidtothemartyrsofRDF.
Thecontentsofthesaiddocumentarereproducedasunder:

RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)
AllIndiaECMeeting
8&9thMay2007,Delhi

Present: RK,SB,DP,APS,Ajay,Jeetan,
Chotan,Tinku,RCP,SunilandHarpalSingh
Absent:Mukhu

51) Homage
Homage paid to the martyrs of various peoples
movements.
Oneminutesilencewasobserved.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
385 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

52) CooptionofNewMembers
ResolutiononCooptionofNewMembers
ComradeRCPrasad,SecretaryofBiharCommittee
wasproposedandcooptedasamemberintheEC
unanimously.AletterfromtheBiharCommitteewas
read out bytheSecretaryregardingtheECofthe
BiharCommitteeaboutitsdecisiontosendhimto
theAllIndiaCommittee.

Secretary proposed Harpal Singh, convenor of

RajasthanunittobecooptedintoECasamember.
TheECunanimouslyagreed.

53) NewUnits.
TheSecretaryreportedthata5membercommittee
ofRDFwasformedinRajasthanwithHarpalSingh
asconvenor.

In Maharashtrathe localcomradesexpressedtheir
inabilitytoformalocalunitofRDFatthemoment.

In Kerala a banner has been started entitled

Revolutionary Peoples Front. The local comrades
want to invite an all India EC member to start
initiate a discussion on perspective of RDF. This
meetingalsowillincludediscussiononNandigram
withaspeakerfromWestBengal.Saibabawillgoto
KeralafromtheEC.

In UP Poorvanchal Sanskritic Manch, Bharat Nau

Jawan Sabha, Inqilabi Chatra Morcha and a Kisan
SanghatanarepreparingtoformRDF.Theprocess
hasstarted.

54) ReportsandReview
a) StateRepressiononOrissaReport
AsperthedecisionoftheearlierECwecouldpursue
and help a Factfinding team of 6 members go to
SouthOrissatobringoutfacts.Theteamwentand
broughtoutareport.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
386 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

b)AntiSalwaJudumCampaign.
Ateamandanactionprogrammewasdrawnbutnot
implementedforsomereasons.

c)PoliticalPrisoners
Some reports and details were collected but not
muchprogresswasmadeonthisissuesofar.Now
wehavetoplanafresh.

d)NagaTrip
CouldnotbedonebecausetheNagaorganisations
werentincontact.Nowitwillbetakenupasthey
havecomeintotouch.

e)OnFarmersIssues
InBihar,Jharkhand,andDelhilimitedwallwriting
andleafletingwasdone.

WestBengal
ECmeetingtookupadiscussionon20 th Novon
the draft manifesto. On many points
clarificationsaresoughtfromtheEC.AnyseniorEC
membershould comeandclarifythepoints.
Aconventionwasconductedonlandissues.
GPM participated in the all India labour strike.
There wasmuchdebateaboutit.
On 26th December GPM observed Maos birth
centenary inahallmeeting.
Since December on Singur there were many
actions throughjointprogramme.
Many programmesofproteststhroughSanghati
Udyag (SolidarityInitiate)havingmorethan30
organizations.
Many forms of struggles through Singur Krishi
Jami Rakha Committee Kolkata based joint
front.
ManyformsofproteststhroughPaschimBengal
Krishi JamiRakshaSamithi.
Many programme through Gana Unnayan Jan
Adhikar SangramSamiti7Parties(PCC,Janatadal,
Janadatal (Secular) Jamajwadi party and others)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
387 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

+19mass organizations: Chair Siddiqulla

Choudhary
Part of Bhumi Uchhed Pratirodh Committee
Nandigram.

Punjab
f) Election boycott programme with 2000
people.
g) BhagatSinghShadatDivasatHussainiwala
with2000people.

Delhi
Mostlyjointprogrammes.
Protest programme against Sadam Hussains
hanging
4000leafletsonagriculturecrisisdistributed.
Leafletsdistributedonsealingissue.
BhagatSinghSahadatDivasProgramme.
ProtestdharnasorganizedtwotimesbeforeCPIM
office
A convention against SEZ in Gandhi Peace
Foundation.
MayDaywith500750workers

Jharkhand
Noimportantprogramme
Wallingandpesteringinsomeplacesonfarmers
issues.
Pressreleaseonbandh.
March 8th programme by NMS in 21 places.
Participation2002000people.
Participatedinorganizingtheantidisplacement
conference.

Bihar
No programmes of RDF banner or constituents
banner thestatenotallowing.
Some small programme on some joint fronts
happened.
AprotestonSadamHussainshanging
On Afzals death sentence on 10 th December, a
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
388 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ghosti wasorganized
ApressreleaseonAllIndiaworkersstrike.
Jhopadpatti footpath dookandaar Sanghatan
takesmanyprotests.
MayDaythroughRDFinKhagaria2000people
participated.
MayDayinNawadain4places.
Onfarmersissuewallingwasdoneinruralareas
and10000leafletsdistributed.

SecretarysSumUp:
Weneedtodevelopstatelevelunitswell,thenonly
wewillbeabletodoourprogrammesinabetter
way.
VicePresidentsRemarks: Politicalprogrammesof
RDFshouldbeplannedaccordingtoourmanifesto
notonadhocbasisorspontaneously.

55) EC Functioning and Work Division Among

ECmembers
Resolution on EC Functioning and Development
oftheOrganisation:
The all India EC discussed and analysed the
weaknessesinitsfunctioningandinimplementing
its planned activities. After discussing different
pointsthoroughlythefollowingdecisionsaretaken:

a) RDFsstrengthliesinitsstateunits.Sothefirst
priority is to strengthen its state units and the
constituteorganizationsineachstatewhereverthe
stateunitsarealreadyinexistence;

b) AllECmembersshouldalsofocustheirattention
inoneormorestatestodevelopstateunits;

c) Bytakingupthepeoplesburningissuesineach
state, our state units and their constituent
organizationsshouldgotothepeopleandorganize
strugglesbytakingourpoliticstothem;

d) We should plan our programmes based on our

manifestoconcretelylinkingitupwiththepresent
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
389 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

localproblemsofthepeopleineachstate;

e) ThepoliticalactioncallsgivenbytheallIndiaEC
shoulddirectlyreflectthegroundlevelproblemsof
the people, whereinthe localunitscan implement
thecallsbylinkingthemwithlocalburningissuesof
thepeople;

f) TheallIndiaECmembersshouldworkinclose
coordination with each other and particularly the
officebearersshouldalsomeetwheneverneededto
interveneintoallmajorburningissueswhichcome
up timetotime at all India level and at different
levelofstates;

g) AllissuesthatvariousECmembersareinvolved
inbuildingstrugglesthroughdifferentfrontsshould
sharevariousaspectswiththeentireECsothatthe
ECwillhavecomprehensiveideaaboutallactivities;

h) A workshop will be conducted with the EC

membersofeachstatecommitteeonorganizational
and political growth of the organization in
connection with the RDFs manifesto and joint
activities;

i) Allreportsfromthestatesshouldbepresentedin
writtenformindetail;

j) Press statements should be issued on all such

burningissuesimmediatelyandtheyshouldsentto
thestateunitsand

k) In addition to other responsibilities in different

fronts each EC member is already involved the
specificStatewiseresponsibilitiesforbuildingRDF
areentrustedhereasfollows:

1. Bihar:RKalongwithRCPrasad
2. UP:RK+APS
3. Jh:Ajay+Jeetan
4. WB:SB+Chotan+Tinku
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
390 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

5. Delhi:SB+Sunil
6. Rajasthan:RK+Harpal
7. UK:Ajay
8. Kerala:SB
9. Punjab:DP+Mukhu
10. Maharashtra:DP
11. Orissa:Ajay+Jeeatan
12. Haryana:Ajay

ResolutiononStateLevelStructures:
All the state units should drive the constitute
organizations to take up peoples issues and
strengtheneachorganization.

Each state unit should take up membership drive

through their constituent organizations and they
shouldalsogiveindividualmembership.

Futureprogramme:
ResolutiononEconomicBlockadeProgramme
AmonthlongprogrammeofEconomicBlockadewill
beobservedstartingfromtheNaxalbariDay,23 May
2007andculminatingwith25and26June2007on
the occasion of Emergency Day against imperialist
plunderandaggressive displacementthroughSEZs
andotherkindsofdisplacement.

AnallIndiaLeafletwillbeissuedimmediately.The
state unitsshould take upthis Economic Blockade
programme by includingimmediate peoplesissues
of their state and bring out the same leaflet or
separate one. The Economic Blockade programme
shouldinvolvelocalpeopleontheirissues.

The importance of Naxalbari uprising and the

presentNandigramresistanceshouldbehighlighted
as the peoples forms of resistance and struggles.
Differentformsofresistanceandpropagandashould
becreativelyplannedandtakenupaccordingtothe
convenienceofthelocalunits.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
391 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Resolution on 150 years of 1857 and Bhagat

SinghsBirthCentenaryProgramme
150 years of 1857 and Bhagat Singhs Birth
Centenary Year should be observed in all states
between 10th May and 28th September 2007. We
shouldjoinwhereverPDFIorganizesprogrammes.In
placeswherePDFIisnotthereornotableorganize
any programme, RDF should organize on its own
bannerorthroughjointbanners.

We willparticipateinthe31stMayprogrammein
Delhi on the banner of PDFI. Some mobilization
shouldbedoneasfaraspossiblefromDelhi.After
this programme we should call for the meeting of
thesubcommitteeofPDFIonthisandtrytoconvince
the committee to organize the rest of the
programmes on the banner of PDFI or PDFI and
othersasajointprogramme.

OurPunjabunithasappealedtoallorganizationsto
holdanimpressiveprogrammeatHussainiwalaon
28th September 2007 on the occasion of Bhagat
Singhsbirthcentenaryyear.Inconnectionwiththis
programmetheallIndiaECcallsuponallstateunits
and fraternal organizations to join programme at
Hussainiwalaasfarpossibleforthemdependingon
theirconvenience.

ResolutiononStateRepressiononRevolutionary
Organizations
Allthestateunitswillsendthedetailsofrepression
on revolutionaryorganizationsby10th June,2007.
After collecting this information, a booklet will be
preparedby15thJuly2007andaprogrammeof
actiontoresisttherepressionbedrawn.

Afterthebookletcomesout,wewillorganizeprotest
conventions in Kolkata, Delhi and other cities by
involving democratic intellectuals and democratic
organizations.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
392 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ResolutiononAntidisplacementIssues
RDF will positively put forward and explain the
limitations in fully involving the subcommittee of
PDFIinameetingofthesubcommittee.

Tentative date for all India bandh is 29 th October

fromourside.Finallythedatehastobefixedafter
consultation with all organizations. To implement
thebandhcall,anappealbyprominentdemocrats
hastobepreparedandwiththisappealweshould
approachdifferentorganizationsandpartieswhich
areagainstdisplacementinanymanner.Weshould
alsoholdfourregionalmeetingsinDelhi,Kolkata,
Mumbai and Hyderabad to get support from the
organizationsandparties.

RDFunitsshouldinvolveintheprocesstakenupby
theVistaapanVirodhiJanVikasAndolan(VVJVA)to
form state units of this front. The state units of
VVJVA in Jharkhand, Orissa, West Bengal,
Chhattisgarh,AndhraPradeshandMaharashtraare
tobeformedimmediately.

RDF will participate in the Kolkata Conference

against SEZs and presents our perspective paper.
Saibaba will prepare the paper andpresent it.We
will also propose that there should only one anti
displacementfrontandhencewewillfirmlyargue
thattheprocessofKolkataConferenceshouldform
onefrontbyemergingthebothprocesses.

We will also argue that the perspective of such a

frontshouldbemadeinsuchawaythattheNGOs
wouldntoccupyitsspace.

West Bengal comrades will immediately meet the

host organizers of the conference in Kolkata and
discussallaspectsdiscussedinthisECmeeting.

ResolutiononPoliticalPrisoners
TheSecretaryalongwithAnjaniandRonawillform
ateamtoimmediatelyatDelhiandactivateworkon
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
393 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Political Prisoners Committee. Jeetan and Chotan

will also join this team in all India work of this
committee.

ResolutiononAntiSalwaJudumCampaign
All RDF unitsandECwill helpthe processofthe
work in the campaign against Salwa Judum. We
shouldcooperatewithCATASinitsactivities.

ResolutiononFarmersIssuesandPDFIActivities.
RDF will work with PDFI on these issues as it is
takingamajorinitiativeonfarmsectorcrisis.Itwill
send delegates and involve in the Patiala Kisan
Panchayat on farmsector issues on24, 25 and 26
May2007.

InUP,aKisanSammelanwillbeorganizedbyPDFI
on 16th June in Mainpuri, and on 17th June the
foundingconferenceofPDFI,UPinthesameplace.
RDFshouldcooperateintheseprogrammes.

DecisionstakenintheearlierECmeetingonfarmers
issuesnowwillbedonethroughPDFI.
ForPDFIofficeanditsfunctioningSaibabawilltalk
toYovaBharat.Therewillbenoresidenceandfood
preparationsintheoffice.DelhiunitofRDFwillfind
apersonforthisoffice.

ResolutiononMagazineandOtherPublications
Themagazineshouldcovermorestrugglereportsin
differentforms.Weshouldcollectmorereportsfrom
the struggles. The magazine should be distributed
more widely among the democrats and common
people.Themagazineshouldcomeoutregularly.We
shouldcollectthereturnsregularly.

A booklet on Bastars people struggle will be

preparedandpublishedbyAugust2007.

JeetanwillsendmaterialonJharkhandstrugglesfor
anotherbookletandalsoforthemagazine.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
394 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ResolutiononOffice
OfficewillbedecidedinconsultationwithDelhiunit
ofRDF.

ResolutiononFunds
The state units which havent paid their monthly
regular contributions for the all India committee
shouldpayinthenextmeeting.

NextMeeting
1and2SeptemberinKolkata
TheEnd

528] FromtheabovedocumentitisclearthatECcommittee
of RDF hadtakenreview ofworkandstepstobetakenbythe
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)inalloverIndiaandfuture
strategywasdecidedtostrengthentheirorganisationandinPoint
no.5atSr.No.11,accusedno.6Saibabawasgivenrespectabilityof
W.B.(WestBengal),Delhi,Kerala.

529] A document at Art.156 having path ex. 4/31.12.12/

rdfpdfi/resolution/7thmeeting titled as REVOLUTIONARY

DEMOCRATIC FRONT (RDF) 7th Central Executive Committee
Meetingwhichwasheldon2728December2007atDelhiwhich
wasattendedbyaccusedno.6Saibabaandothermembers.The
contentsofthesaidletterarereproducedasunder:

REVOLUTIONARYDEMOCRATICFRONT(RDF)
7thCentralExecutiveCommitteeMeeting
2728December2007,Delhi
Attended by: Raj Kishore, Darshan Pal, Sai Baba,
Arjun Prasad, Jeetan, Tinku Da, R C Prasad, Ajay,
BaldevMakkhoo
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
395 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Absent : Khagenda,Harpal,DPM,ChottanDa,
AmritRabha,andKrishnan
Agenda:
1]Homage
2]ReviewoflastmeetingdecisionandReportsfrom
allIndiaandstate
3]InternationalReporting
4]RDFstateorganisationsituationandconference
5]PDFI
6]FutureTasks:
AntiDisplacementFront
PoliticalPrisoners
IndoNagapeopletopeopledialogue
GPCR
OnEmergencyday
StateAttackonRevolutionaryMovement
6]Fundsandbudget
7]PublicationsandWebsite
8]Others
9]SelfcriticismCriticism

Resolution1:Toraisevoiceagainststatepolicyof
brutalsuppressionofnaxalitemovement,ateamof
intellectual will be formed. All ECM will talk to
intellectual for this team. A teamof RDF ecm is
formedincludingSaibaba,Rajkishore,TinkuDa.A
BookletonStaterepressionwillbepublished.

Resolution2:Review
1]Bookletonstaterepressionwasnotpublishedyet
because reports of repression were not sent from
states.Otherprogrammewasnottakenduetothis.

2]Politicalprisonercampaignhasnotmovedahead
due to lack of preparation. A meeting to form a
preparatorycommitteehas been called on 13th
January2008toorganizeAllIndiaconferenceto
formCommitteetoReleasePoliticalPrisoner.

Fromthisdocumentitisclearthatitwasresolvedto
raise voice against State policy and a team of
intellectualwillbeformed.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
396 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

530] A document at Article 157 having path ex.

4/31.12.12/rdfpdfi/resolution/ECResolutions/JointMeetingofAIPRF
and SFPR 200505_Modified containing Resolutions of Joint
Meeting of AIPRF and SFPR held on 20 May 2005 at Delhi. The
contentsoftheresolutionsofthemeetingarereproducedasunder:
JointMeetingofAIPRFandSFPR

Date:20thMay,2005
Delhi.

Attendance:
From:AIPRFEC:Dr.DarshanPal,G.N.Saibaba,
ArjunPrasadSingh,KumarBuradikatti,Gurmeet
Singh,RajaSarkel.
FromSFPREC:RajKishor,TaraSingh,Sunil,B.P.
Rakshit,Jeetan.

Homage paid to all those martyrs who have laid

downtheirliveforthesakeofestablishinganew
social order free fromallkindofexploitation and
oppression.

Selfintroductionofeachmemberdone.

Saibaba and Raj Kisore, the secretaries of both

AIPRF and SFPR briefed the process and the
background of the discussions conducted between
thedelegationsoforganisations,whichwasaimed
atmergingthetwoorganizationsintoasingleone.
He,aspertheconclusionsarrivedatthosemeetings,
proposed to merge the tow organizations into a
singleone.Accordingtotheunderstandingofthose
meetings, also he explained that the revolutionary
politics,i.e.upholdingtherevolutionarymovements
thataregoingonacrossthecountry,propagatingthe
revolutionary politics, boycotting the
parliamentaryelections,andthusshowingthereal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
397 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

revolutionarypathtothevastIndianmasses,should
bethepoliticalperspectiveoftheneworganization.

Resolution:1
All the members present in the meeting
unanimouslyresolvedtounifyAIPRFandSFPRinto
one organization with a new name Revolutionary
Democratic Front (RDF). RDF shall work with a
perspectiveoftakingNewDemocraticRevolutionary
politicsintothebroadmassesofthecountrywith
the slogans like Naxalbary Ekhi Rastha; Andhra
Bihar, Jharkhand Chattisgah Dikhata hain Ratsha
and it shallworkamong the massesbytakingup
election boycott in order to project the new
democraticpoliticalalternativeastheonlywayfor
the liberation of the country and the people from
imperialismandfeudalism.RDFsupportsandstrives
tointegratewithalldemocraticandantiimperialist
struggles of workers, peasants, women, dalits,
nationalities,adivasis,youthetc.,

Today, i.e. 20th May 2005, we herewith constitute

the new formation by merging both the ECs of
AIPRF and SFPR and resolve to constitute all our
lowercommitteesbymergingvariousunits.

Reservation of Gurmeet, Darshan, Kumar and

Arjun: RDF should not participate in the
parliamentary election nor should it call for
electionboycottallthetime.Itmayexpose,boycott
etc, depending upon the concrete situation of the
timeandplace.

Resolution2:
After merging both the ECs, an adhoc executive
committeeisconstitutedwith18membersincluding
aPresident(KhagenDas),VicePresident(Darshan
Pal), Secretary (Raj Kishore), Assistant Secretaries
(G N Saibaba, Sunil, Punna Rao) and Treasurer
(Tara Singh). Other members: Arjun Prasad, Ajay
(Haryana), Amrit Rabha(Assam),Krihanan(Tamil
Nadu), Jitan Marandi ( Jharkhand), Kumar
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
398 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(Maharastra), Shivam Kutty (Kerala), Vijay

(Rajastan),Tinku(WestBengal),ChotanDas(West
Bengal),Ghoran(Orissa).

Resolution 3: The draft declaration cum press

release placed in the meeting will be improved
mainly in language and slightly in content by
incorporating the suggestions and amendments
different members made. Gurmeet will take the
responsibilitytodosoandplaceitbytodayevening
beforethemeetingwillbeover.

Resolution4: APressmeetshouldbeheldon23rd
May,atMulakatRestaurantinNewDelhiat3p.m.
to declare the merge and the future political
orientationoftheneworganization.Themeetwill
be addressed by Raj Kisore, Dr. Darshan Pal, and
TaraSinghandG.N.SaibabaandSunilwillbeon
the dais. After the pressmeet, a small cultural
programmewillbeperformedoutsidethevenueas
a part ofon going antirepressioncampaign being
carriedoutjointlybyAIPRFandSFPR.

Resolution5:Wehavetakenanimportantdecision
ofmergingourtwoorganizationsintoasingleone
andthepoliticalperspectiveoftheoldorganizations
hasdrasticallybeenchanged.Forsuchanimportant
meeting, we should have called all central level
ECMsofthebothorganizationssoastoinvolveall
oftheminthemergerprocess.Thedecisionnotto
callsomemembersisnotright.Intheformationof
the new committee should have been included all
the existingmembersofthe bothorganizations.If
needed,newmemberscouldbecooptedandthose
who want to work in some other field could be
relieved.Whileintheorganizationalmergeratstate
level and other lower levels to be taken up
henceforth,thismistakeshouldberectified.

Resolution5:Acircularshouldbeissuedbytheall
India EC to the lower committees explaining the
merger and the immediate future tasks before us.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
399 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

The technical details with regard to the name,

structureandthewaytomergeetc,intheprocessof
mergingtheorganizationsatlowerlevelscouldbe
workedoutinaccordancewiththelocaldynamics
prevailing. In the circular, we should give first
preference to the merger of the organizations
followed by the other activities. Other activities
includemainlyorganizingprogrammesagainstthe
antipeoples policies of the UPA government for
whichacentralleafletwillbeprepared,organizinga
protest march in Delhi against the death penalty
awarded to five peasants of Bihar and other
activitiesconcerningthelocalpolitics.

Resolution 5: For the coming one issue, Jan

Pratirodhwillbebroughtout,asanorganofRDF,
by the same existing editorial team but with only
Arjun Prasad Singhs name as its editor, publisher
andownerandthesameAIPRFsaddresspublished.
InthenextECmeeting,theeditorialboardwillbe
constituted and the address to be given in the
magazinewillbedecided.Copiestobeprintedfor
thenextissueare1500.AllthemembersoftheEC
mustsendthereportsandarticlestoArjunindue
time.

Resolution6:ThenextECmeetingwillbeheldon
24th and25th,AugustinPunjab.Thearrangements
forthesamewillbemadebyTaraSingh.

YoursComradeinStruggle..

RajKishore
Secretary
AdhocExecutiveCommittee
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)

20thMay,2005
Delhi
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
400 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

531] From the said document it is clear that accused no.6

Saibaba is the founder of Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF).
From the contents of the said letter it is clear that accused no.6
Saibaba was the Secretary ofAIPRFandRajkishoreisSecretaryof
SFPR and alongwith other members of AIPRF and SFPR it was
unanimously resolved to merge AIPRF and SFPR into one new
organizationbynameRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)with
thesloganslikeNaxalbaryEkhiRastha,AndhraBihar,Jharkhand
ChattisgarhDikhatahainRatsaandonitsformationaccusedno.6
Saibaba was declared as Assistant Secretary of Revolutionary
DemocraticFront(RDF)andpressmeetingwastobemadeabout
themergerofAIPRFandSFPRintoRevolutionaryDemocraticFront
(RDF)byRajkishore,DarshanPalandaccusedno.6Saibabaandit
wasfurtherresolvedthatmagazineJanapratirodhwillbebroughtas
anorganofRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF). Fromperusal
ofthesameitisclearthatRDFisfrontalorganizationofbannedCPI
(Maoist)organization.

532] Art.158havingpathex.4/31.12.12/rdfpdfi/resolution
/AIPRF_SFPR_Question_of_merger(1),isaletteraddressedtoThe
EcAIPRF,NewDelhiwrittenbyAIPRFcitycommitteeWestBengal
whereinitisstatedWeknowfromyourjointdeclarationthatAIPRF
and SFPR merged in a single organization named RDF, and also
statedWhatspecificpracticalexperienceAIPRFhadgatheredsothat
wecantakethesloganslikeNaxalBariEKHiRasta?'ElectionBoycot
call' or 'AndhraBiharJharkhandChattisgark Dikhata Hai Rsta' was
notoverconstitutionalslogans.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
401 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

533] A document at Article 159 having path ex.

4/31.12.12/RDFConferencematerial/DRAFTMANIFESTOOF RDF
amendedbyconferenceisareviseddraftasperECsuggestionstitled
as, Draft Manifesto of Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF).
Thecontentsofthesaiddraftisreproducedasunder:
ReviseddraftasperECsuggestions

RiseResistLiberate

DraftManifestoofRevolutionaryDemocratic
Front(RDF)

WhenBritishimperialismformallydevolvedpower
in1947,thepeopleofIndiahopedthattheywould
have freedom and democracy and that imperialist
andfeudalexploitationandoppressionwouldbea
thingofthepast.Andtheirstandardoflivingwould
improve. Buttheirhopesandaspirationshavenot
beenfulfilled.Evenafterhalfacenturynotonlyis
thepovertyasacuteitisincreasingatarapidrate
withthecurrentoffensiveofimperialism.Overthe
last decade starvation deaths and suicides,
particularlyinthebackwardruralareas,hasreached
ascale neverwitnessedbefore inpost1947India.
And together with this the Indian rulers have
brought in draconian levels of repression, often
worsethanincolonialtimes.

Sincetheformaldevolutionofpower,afewchanges
in Indias political, economic and cultural spheres
have been witnessed.The bourgeoisparliamentary
system,whichisfakeinessence,withallitsvaried
forms,includinganAssembly,Parliament,universal
suffrageetc.havebeenplacedandprojectedbefore
the people, proclaiming that the masses could
enforcetheirfreedomanddemocraticrightsthrough
thissystemwhichisnothingbutafalseandbogus
one.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
402 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

After 1947, the Nehru Government, through an

enactment, announced the abolition of the
Zamindarisystem.Butthisacthasnotbeeneffective
in abolishing the ZamindariJotedari system i.e.
could not stop semifeudal exploitation and
oppression. Feudal lords have got in their
possession; thousands of acres of land and the
peasants are subjected to medieval feudal
exploitation. Semifeudal exploitation and
oppressionbasesuponbrahmanicalcastesystemhas
becomeanobstaclenotonlytothedevelopmentof
theagrarianeconomybutalsototheindustrialas
wellassocialdevelopmentofIndia.Therefore,apart
fromthepeasantry,allstrataofdemocraticpeople,
includingworkers,students,youth,intellectuals,do
have a contradiction with feudalism and it is
sharpeningwitheverypassingday.

Feudalism,inordertocontinuetothriveintheface
of the mighty antifeudal struggles of the masses,
hastakenrefugeinthelapofimperialism.Thebig
comprador capitalists are also under the aegis of
imperialism. They have also been compromising
withfeudalismfromtheverybeginning.

Colonialexploitationanditsruledidnotcometoan
end after the socalled independence. The change
that has actually occurred is that India has been
transformedfromacolonial,semifeudalcountry,to
asemicolonialandsemifeudaloneunderapolicy
of neocolonialism pursued by imperialism. The
alliance of imperialism and the comprador
bourgeoisie with brahamanical caste based
feudalismisstillinforceandthisveryforceisruling
thecountry.

Afterthetransferofpowerthisallianceintroduced
somechangesinlandrelationswithoutaffectingthe
interests of the landlords as far as possible.
Consequently, even after 58 years of socalled
independence the monopoly over land by big
landlordspersists.DespitevariouslandreformActs
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
403 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

e.g. abolition of intermediary system of land

tenure (zamindari, jagirdari, etc), land ceiling act,
act for the security of tenancy right, acts for the
protectionoftriballand,etcthelandlordswere
allowed evade those acts providing enough time
between enactment and implementation. The land
reformprogrammethusremainedahoax.Thevast
majorityoftheruralpoorremainsdeprivedofthe
landandlandlesspeasantsandagriculturallabourer
still remain landless. In rural India inhuman
exploitation continues to exist. The peasants are
being exploited ruthlessly by the landlords/big
landowners, usurers and merchants rendering the
plight of the peasants more and more deplorable.
Even the brutal forms of extraeconomic coercion,
likethebondedlaboursystem,casteoppressionand
untouchability,etcarestillinpractice.

Imperialist agrotechnology and socalled green

revolutionhaveresultedinanexorbitantincreasein
the cost of agricultural production. In many areas
commercial crops like tea, fruits, etc. and
pisciculturehavebeenintroducedinsteadofstaple
foodgrain production. The Transnational and
compradorbigbourgeoiscompaniesarecontrolling
theseataneverincreasingrate.Duetopressuresof
thiscliquethegovt.ofIndiahasrevokedeventhe
nominalLandCeilingAct.Theneweconomicpolicy
andtheWTOhaveacceleratedtheprocess.Quality
seeds,fertilizers,insecticidesetc.areallbeyondthe
reachofthepoorandmiddlepeasants.Reductionof
subsidy for fertilizers at the dictates of the World
Bank has come as a heavy blow to the peasants.
Particularly the middle and poor peasants are the
worst victims. The slogan from farmhouse to the
portistheoutcomeofthemarketorientedpolicyof
the government. This policy is resulting in the
eviction of those peasants who are engaged in
agriculturemainlyfortheirlivelihood.Theincidents
of suicide committed by the commercial crops
growing peasants in different parts of the country
areontheriseduetotheconditionofthepeasant
beingseverelysteepedinthecrisis.Besidesthis,the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
404 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

foodcrisisinIndiaisgraduallyincreasing.Andall
thesearetheoutcomeoftherottensemifeudaland
semicolonialsystem.

Sincetheapparentdevolutionofpowerin1947the
comprador bureaucratic bourgeoisie and big
landlords have been uninterruptedly pursuing the
policies dictated by imperialism. In the industrial
sectorforeigncapitalhadinfact,begunincreasing
itsdominancestraightway,directlyandalsothrough
theircollaborationwithbigIndianenterprises.The
rulingclasseshavebeenservingtheimperialistsas
lackeyssincethetimeofNehru.Andduringthelast
quarterofthesixtiestheybegantoinclineforacting
asloyalagentsoftheerstwhileSovietsuperpower.
Butsincetheeightiestheybegantotilttowardsthe
US for economic assistance and after the total
collapseoftheUSSRtheybecamemoreandmore
dependentonAmerica.AtpresentAmericaassumes
the dominant positionthoughthe influenceofthe
EU countries, particularly France and Germany,
alongwithJapanandRussia,hasbeenincreasing.
Since the early 1980s the government of Indira
Gandhihastakenhugeloansaswellaslargescale
foreigninvestmentthroughMNCTNCandfromthe
IMF/WBonhardtermsandconditions.Subsequent
governmentshavealsoreceivedfabulousamountof
loansfromtheIMF&WorldBank,andinorderto
satisfy the needs of the imperialists they have to
introduceasetofsocallednewpoliciesnamely,the
new economic policy, new industrial policy,
newtextilespolicy,neweducationpolicy,etc.

In1980IndiasforeigndebtreadatRupees30,000
croresandbyJuneof1991itregisteredafourfold
increasetoreachthefigureatRs.1,32,000crores,
andtodayithascometoanastronomicalfigureof
Rs.5,00,000crores.Thegovt.ofIndiahastopayRs.
35,000 crores per annum as an interest on her
externaldebt.AtpresenteverycitizenofIndiahasto
beartheburdenofexternaldebtofworthmorethan
Rs.5,000.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
405 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Along with these there have been many trade

agreements. In this way different imperialist
countries,particularlyAmerica,havebeenexploiting
India more severely; not only that, they are
increasing their stranglehold to politically control
India.

FollowingMexicoandBrazil,Indiahasbecome the
third biggest debtor country(?) in the oppressed
countries of the World. Since the country has
become entangled deeply in a debttrap, even the
nominalrestrictionsthatprevailedinthepastonthe
multinational and transnational companies have
been totally withdrawn by the exploiting classes.
Consequently,theyhavebeengivenpermissionfor
theentry,inabigway,toseveralimportantsectors
includingmines,energyproductionanddefence.In
additionthousandsofcroresofpublicsectorassets
are being handed over at cheap rates to the
multinationalsandcompradorbigbourgeoisie.

The Indian government has taken loans from the

World Bank on hard terms with derogatory
conditionalities. The fatal consequence of this has
alsofallenupontheworkingclass,resultinginthe
golden handshake, layoff, retrenchment, and
curtailment of real wages, as well as massive
retrenchmentofworkersandabigdifferenceinpay
scale announced in the report of the sixth Pay
Commission of the central government. Various
types of draconian laws have been imposed to
suppresstheworkingclassmovement.Tradeunion
activitiesandtheminimumrightsofworkershave
beenlimitedmoreandmorebydefacto,declaring
the workers strikes as illegal. The number of
educatedunemployedfiguresmorethanfivecrores,
whiletheunemployedandsemiemployedisabout
32 crores. Five lakh factories have been closed
down.InIndianmorethanpeoplehavebeenliving
below the poverty line and 40 crore are illiterate.
Large numbers of people do not have any
opportunityformedicaltreatment;lakhsofpeople
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
406 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

havenodwellinghousesatall.

In addition, brutal repression continues upon all

democratic movements. The leaders and cadres of
the trade unions and civil liberties organizations
andevenjournalistshavebeenkilled.

The people have been uninterruptedly fighting

against all this exploitation and oppression. The
peasantry and working class have fought many
heroic battles and the students, youth, women,
pettybourgeoisie and intellectuals have waged
many a movement. The enemies have butchered
thousands of people; lakhs of people are arrested
and imprisoned while innumerable people have
beentortured.Inspiteofhavingscarifiedtheirself
interestsandevendedicatedtheirlives,thepeople
have not yet achieved real independence and
democracy.Thefundamentalproblemsofthepeople
areyettobesolved.

The solution of the fundamental problems of the

peopleisrelatedtotherevolutionarychangesofthe
whole social system. So the mass struggles too
cannot be separated and isolated from the
revolutionary struggle for changing the social
system.Butthereformistandrevisionistpartiesof
our country have deflected the mass struggles to
savetheinterestsofimperialismandfeudalismand
ledpeoplesresentmenttowardstheballotbox.They
haveconfinedthemassstrugglesonlytothestruggle
for achieving the partial demands. But neither do
theyrousethepeopleinthespiritofthestrugglefor
eradication of imperialism, feudalism and the
present social systemandforthe establishment of
democratic social system nor do they teach the
people of the importance ofthenecessitytounite
withthesestruggles.

After Telengana the great peasant movement in

Naxalbari once again dealt a deathblow against
reformism and revisionism. And it illuminated the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
407 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

path of the Indian revolution. Naxalbari opened a

newchapterinthehistoryofthepeasantstrugglein
India and held aloft the banner of agrarian
revolutionandthepoliticsofseizureofstatepower.

The peasant struggle of Naxalbari was not merely

the struggle for the seizure of land. It was the
struggle of the people with the aim of seizure of
politicalpowerfortheabolitionofthesemifeudal
and semicolonial system as well as for the
establishmentofalleconomicandpoliticalrightsof
the people, including that over land. It does
symbolize the great political significance of the
Naxalbari struggle. So, the struggle of Naxalbari
bearsnotonlyasignificanceforthestrugglesofthe
poorandlandlesspeasantsbutitalsocarriesgreat
significanceasastrugglefortheemancipationofall
theantifeudalandantiimperialistpeopleofIndia.
ForthisreasonthestruggleofNaxalbariwasableto
stirandrousethewholecountryandwassuccessful
to rally the greater section of the masses of the
peasantry, working class, students, youth, women,
intellectualsandallothersectionsofthedemocratic
peopleonthebasisofthesloganNaxalbariEkHi
Rasta. Today, the agrarian revolutionary torch of
Naxalbari is shining more brightly in Telangana,
Andhra, Jharkhand, Bihar, Dandakaranya, Odisha
and some other parts in the country and is
illuminatingthepathofIndianrevolution.

The struggle of Naxalbari brought about a great

revolutionintheconsciousnessofthepeoplethe
consciousnessforsocialrevolution.Inthesphereof
struggle, it upheld a new orientationthe
orientation of agrarian revolution. In linked the
revolutionary mass struggle with the revolutionary
struggleforsocialchange.Today,variousnewforms
and tactics of mass struggle have developed and
extendtodifferentpartsofthecountry.

PRESENTPOLITICALSITUATION
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
408 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Today, the imperialist system has plunged into a

deep economic and political crisis. This crisis is
deepening and becoming more and more acute in
everypassingday.Thisvindicatesthatthecrisisin
theworldimperialistsystemispermanent,whilethe
recovery is temporary and relative. At present the
crisisoftheimperialistsystemhasbeengettingmore
and more acute inspite of massive intervention by
theimperialistgovernmentstocomeoutofit.The
governmentsoftheimperialistcountrieshavebeen
continuingtoshifttheburdenofthecrisisontothe
shoulder of the people of the backward countries
like India. As a result, the economic crisis of our
countryisalsodeepeningandbecomingmoreand
moreacuteeveryday.

Thecontradictionsamongtheimperialistcountries
in the international arena are simultaneously
reflected in India as well. Consequently, these
contradictions are also reflected in the political
partiesoftheexploitingclasses,inthegovernment
and the administration and also in the police and
militarydepartments.Splitswithintheoldpolitical
partiesandfallofgovernmentsandthesubsequent
formationofnewpartiesandgovernmentsaregoing
on just like a house of cards. News of increasing
sharpness of contradictions between army officers
andordinaryarmypersonnelandalsobetweenthe
policeofficersandthepolicepersonalsaresurfacing
timetotime.Asaresultofinternalcontradictions,
all the organizations of the ruling classes are
becominggraduallyweaker.Bothinthecentreand
inmanystates,governmentsbyasinglepartyhaving
an absolute majority are absent. The coalition
governmentsarefunctioningbymanipulationonly.
TheparliamentarypartieslikeCongress,JanataDal,
BJP, Rastriya Janata Dal, Samata Party, Bahujan
SamajParty,SamajwadiParty,CPI,CPI(M),Telugu
Desam, Akali Dal, AIADMK, DMK, AGP etc. are
internally divided in numerous groups or lobbies
duetoinnercontradictionsandareisolatedfromthe
people.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
409 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

In our country, the contradiction between

imperialism andthe majority of the Indian people
and the contradiction between Brahmanical caste
based feudalism and the greater masses of the
people are intensifying day by day. Due to the
contradictions among the imperialist powers, the
deep economic and political crisis, and ever
increasingresistancestruggleofthepeople,thereis
no sign of stability in the whole ruling system
including the parliamentary system. Disorder and
uncertaintyareuninterruptedlyprevailingandwill
continuetoprevailinalltheeconomicandpolitical
spheresofIndia.

INDIANPARLIAMENTARYSYSTEM

This crisis expresses itself in the acute infights

within the ruling class parties and permanent
political instability in the entire ruling and
parliamentary system. It renders more and more
exposureoftheparliamentarysystemitspolitics
and parliamentary ruling parties. The state
machinerydevelopedbytherulingclassesconsists
ofacorruptedbureaucracy,antipeoplejudiciary,a
policeforceandawellequippedmodernarmyand
other armed forces. The role of the parliamentary
systemistocoverthisruthlessruleandtodelude
thepeople.Rulingclasspartiesandtheirsycophants
projecttheparliamentaryelectionasasystemwhich
peoplecanusetoasserttheirdemocraticrights.This
falsenotionisalsobeingexposedbytheveryactsof
therulingclassthemselves.Thereisunprecedented
malpractice, widespread rigging and rampant
corruption in all parliamentary and assembly
elections. Elections are conducted by the force of
musclepower. This shatters the myth of the
democratic character of the Indian parliamentary
electoralsystem!

Today, the ministers and top leaders of different

parliamentary parties have misappropriated crores
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
410 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ofrupeesthroughinnumerablescandals.Topstate
leaders,MLAsandMPs,topadministrativeofficers,
andtoparmyofficersnoneofthemdoanything
fortheinterestoftheCountryorthePeople.Rather
theiractivitiesservetheinterestofimperialismand
feudalism only. The activities of these antipeople
leaders have exposed the real character of
independence and democracy of India. No
democratic decision is ever found in any of the
parliamentary parties nor can any bourgeois
democracybeexpectedfromthem.

In the present situation, it is almost impossible to

provideanyreformorrelieftothemassesthrough
the parliamentary system. (even if it make reform
possible,itshouldberejected) Eventheprocessof
judiciaryisnotconsistentwiththeprovisionsofthe
Indian Constitution. The mass movements for the
fulfilment ofminimumdemandsofthepeople are
brutallysuppressedwithlathi,bulletsandbayonets.
The consciousness of the people is rapidly
developing about the bluff of the parliamentary
system. In the areas of agrarian revolutionary
struggles of Andhra, Jharkhand, Bihar and
Dandakaranya the people have raised the slogan
thattheboycottofelectionsisademocraticright.
Theyhavetranslatedthissloganintoabroadmass
movement of the active boycott of elections. This
movementhasexpandedtoawiderareafacingthe
onslaughts of the police and cadres of electoral
parties.Inthenortheasternregion,thepeopleofthe
various nationalities of Assam. Tripura, Manipur,
Nagaland and also of Kashmir etc. have advanced
their liberation struggle defying the parliamentary
pathandboycottingtheelections.Inthecourseof
electionboycott movement many new forms of
strugglehavebeenemerging.

DIVIDEANDRULEANEVILDESIGN

The governments of the ruling classes have been

adopting one after another antipeople policies to
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
411 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

comeoutofthissevereeconomicandpoliticalcrisis.
As a result of this the plight of the people is
becoming more and more miserable. In this
condition antistate struggles of the people have
been developing in different parts of the country.
Therulingclasspartiescannotfindanyviableslogan
to hoodwink the people. They have therefore
resortedtodivideandrulepoliciesmoreandmore,
alongwithrepressivemeasurestofoiltheantistate
united struggles of the people. Accordingly they
havebeenhatchingoneafteranothersinisterplots
instigating casteism, racial hatred, communalism
and religious fundamentalism, particularly Hindu
fundamentalism.Theyhavebeentryingtheirbestto
put people against the people. They have openly
encourage Hindu fundamentalism and helped
develop vicious Hindu fascist forces like the RSS,
BajrangDal,VHP,andShivSena.ThesefascistHindu
forces have time and again organised brutal
pogroms, as in Gujarat, Kandhmal and danced a
dragonlikedance ofdeath.Theaimoftheruling
classesistoturntheclassstruggleintoafatricidal
warbetweencommunities.

ThisHinducommunalismisalsodirectedagainstthe
dalit sections, Adivasis and women. The brutal
Hindu fundamentalist forces help perpetuate and
utilize the caste system, particularly Brahminical
casteism,asanothertooltoinstigatepeopleinthe
ongoingcastewar.Thustheydistractpeoplefrom
thestruggleagainsttherulingclasses.

SOCIALOPPRESSION

In India the two most prominent aspects of social

oppressionarepatriarchaloppressiononwomenand
casteoppressiononthelowercastes,particularlythe
despicablepracticeofuntouchabilityagainstdalits.

Women
Womenremainoneofthemostoppressedsections
of society. Apart from the feudal and imperialist
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
412 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

exploitation,theyalsobeartheburdenofpatriarchal
oppression. Apart from the imperialistfeudal
exploitation and oppression women are also
subjected to male oppression and suppression
through patriarchal institutions, like family, caste
system, property relations and culture. Sexual
harassment and other atrocities on women have
increasedinrecentyears,particularlybecauseofso
called liberalization and imperialist Globalization
andConsumerism.Thesocalledconstitutionallaws
inprovidingequalitytowomenhaveprovedtobea
hoax. The women masses, particularly the women
fromthelandlessandpoorpeasantsareincreasingly
receptive to the revolutionary democratic politics
andideology.Thefactisthatwomenrepresenthalf
ofthesky.Withoutunleashingthefuryofwomen
asamightyforceofrevolution,victoryinrevolution
isimpossible.Hence,themobilizationofparticularly
toilingwomenintherevolutionarystruggle against
imperialism and feudalism is a must. (add
Economic exploitation of women and the honour
killingasatooltokeepcastebasedfeudalismintact)

CASTEOPPRESSION&UNTOUCHABILITY

Besidesthefeudalandimperialistclassexploitation
andoppressiontheDalitmassesarealsocaughtin
theageoldviciousgripofthecastesystem.Thatis
whytheyarealsothevictimsofuntouchability,cast
discrimination and upper caste chauvinism. The
attacksonDalitsbytheuppercastelandlordsand
their goons along with the state machinery have
increasedrecently.Duetodeeplyingrainedcasteist
thinking, particularly against dalits, even amongst
backwardcastes,inmanypartsofthecountrythere
havebeenagrowingnumberofattacksbyarising
sectionofnewfeudallordsofthesebackwardcastes
againstdalits.Thisisparticularlymanifestinthose
areas where feudal authority is threatened by the
increasing assertion of dalits, especially of their
landless and poor sections. Many are unable to
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
413 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

tolerate any rise in status, whether economic or

educational of the dalits, or their increased
assertion.Theobnoxiouscastesystemandcasteism
is continuously being perpetuated by the feudal
ruling classes and later by the imperialism for
thousand of years. They continue to use and
instigatethissystemtoalsodividetheworkingclass,
peasantry and other working people so that they
may continue their class exploitation and
oppression. They use it for derailing their actual
struggle directed against imperialism, feudalism.
Dalit section ofthe people ismostly the victim of
these intrigues. Accordingly, the Dalits are being
treatedassecondgradecitizens.Eventoday90to
95%fromamongthemareeitherlandlessandpoor
peasants or village labourers. Even today their
strugglesagainsttherulingclassesforgettingequal
status in the society are being treated inhumanly
and make victims of these vicious attacks by the
ruling classes and their state machinery. These
attacks are being manifested in the form of
massacresandmassgangrapes.

IMPERIALIST&FEUDALCULTURE

RuralIndiaisdominatedbyaculturethatprotects,
instigates and propagates superstition, casteism,
untouchability, authoritarian concepts, patriarchy,
and religious fundamentalism, along with other
feudal concepts, customs and habits. This anti
peoplecultureservestheinterestsofthelandlords,
usurers, merchants and other feudal/semifeudal
forceswhodominatetheruraleconomy.Theyensure
thepersistenceofthiscultureandalsopavetheway
for decadent imperialist forces to perpetuate their
dominationoverthepeopleofthecountry.Theyalso
encourage the culture of the hatred for labour,
autocracy, imperialist, imperialist slavery, blind
greed,aimlessness,selfcenterednessandego,anda
pervertedculture.

Rampant propaganda of imperialist and feudal

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
414 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

cultureisontherisethroughtheTV,radio,cinema,
dance,song,drama,newspapersandvarioustypes
of periodicals. Liquor, gambling and drugs are
growingwidely.Therulingclasses,withthehelpof
their propaganda machinery propagate this
degenerate culture throughout the country. This
rulingclasssponsoredcultureintendstodestroythe
sense of just and, human values, democratic and
patrioticvalues,andrationalandscientificideasof
thepeople.

Againstthisgloomyanddegenerateculturespread
byimperialistsandfeudaloligarchies,revolutionary
masses have been consistently and gradually
building up peoples culture based on the
consolidated peoples movements against brutal
feudal authority and inhuman imperialist
exploitation. Slowly and gradually this centre of
peoples culture is taking shape in the areas of
intensepeoplesstrugglesoftheIndianrevolutionary
movement.

OPPRESIONONNATIONALITIES

India is a vast multinational country comprising

various oppressed nationalities and tribes. These
nationalities are going through different stages of
theirdevelopment.Indiaspresentboundarieswere
drawnbyBritishimperialists.Thecurrentunityis
based on the subjugation of many people and
nationalitiestoanarbitrarycentralauthority.Hence,
thisunequalandreactionaryunityisveryfragile.
InIndiatodaymanynationalitystrugglesinvarious
parts of the country assuming various forms,
including armed struggle, are going on and
advancing. The overall picture reflects the rousing
moodofthemasses.Thereactionaryrulingclasses
andtheirimperialistchieftains,particularlytheUS
imperialists, are desperately engaged in ruthlessly
suppressingthesestruggles.Thestrugglesofvarious
nationalities,particularlytheKashmir,Naga,Assam,
ManipurandothernationalitiesintheNorthEastern
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
415 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

regionarecontinuingthearmedstruggleagainstthe
Indian state. These struggles continue to strike
powerful blows against the most repressive armed
forces of the reactionary ruling classes. Until now
over90thousandstoilingpeoplehavebeenkilledin
Kashmirinthelast15yearsalone.MillionsofIndian
armedforcesaredeployedinthesenationalitiesto
suppress their movements brutally under the iron
heelofthemilitarymight,buteventhentheburning
flamesofthesestrugglescouldnotbeextinguished.
Thepeopleofthesenationalitiesarestrugglingnot
onlyfortheiridentitybutalsoforthejustcauseof
achieving their honourable right of self
determinationincludingtherighttosecession.Itis
the masses of toiling people particularly the
peasantry who bear the largest burden of the
oppression of a nationality. Undoubtedly it is true
that this is the real material basis beneath these
struggles, viewing from this angle also these
nationalitystrugglescanachievegenuineliberation
and the right of self determination including the
right to secession as a part of the larger struggle
directedagainsttheIndianrulingclassesandtheir
imperialist chieftains, particularly the US
imperialists.TheRDFunequivocallysupportsthese
nationality strugglesandthe struggle,forseparate
statehoodandresolutelyopposetheviciousattempts
of the Indian ruling classes to suppress these
nationality movements. While, firmly uniting with
the people, each and every struggle of the
nationalities should be supported if it is directed
againsttheIndianstatesoppression,repressionand
occupation.

INDIANEXPANSIONISM

The expansionist policies of the comprador

bureaucratbourgeoisiehasbecomeagreatthreatto
the security and integrity of the neighbouring
countriesofSouthAsiaandtheirpeople.Through
implementation of this policy the ruling classes of
Indiaintendtograbtheirmarketandsourcesofraw
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
416 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

materials.Thisexpansionistpolicyhasbeenbacked
and encouraged by the imperialist forces as they
consider the Indian ruling classes as a timetested
medium for their exploitation and domination.
Following this expansionist policy the Government
ofIndiaannexedSikkim,capturedtheirmarketsand
further intensified exploitation, rendering suffering
to the Sikkimese people. They directly threatened
Bhutan by sending the army into its territory and
compelled the Bhutanese government tocrushthe
nationality movements based there. In this
suppression campaign the Bhutanese government
had deployed the Bhutanese army which was
utilized as cannon fodder. The nuclear blasts and
launching of the Prithvi and Agni missiles were
plannedbytheexpansionistrulingclassestoinstil
fearamongthepeopleofSouthAsiancountriesand
subduethem.

TheyhavealsobeenusingtheSAARCprimarilyfor
thesettingupaFreeTradeAreatoallowthefree
flow of goods from India, thereby seizing their
markets.Oflate,theyalsoseektouseitfortheirso
calledantiterroristpoliciesthroughoutSouthAsia,
to suppress peoplesandnationalitymovementsin
theregion.

TherulingclassesofIndiainterfereintheinternal
affairs of Nepal and have taken all sorts of
preparationstosendthearmyintoNepaltosuppress
the revolutionary movement of the people, led by
theMaoists,whichhasbeensurgingaheadfollowing
thepathofprotractedpeopleswar.

BRUTAL STATE REPRESSION AND RESISTANCE

OFTHEPEOPLE

ThepeopleofIndiahavebeenplungedintoruthless
economic exploitation and brutal political
oppression. The ruling classes are unable to solve
theproblemsofthepeople.Rathertheproblemsare
continuously increasing. Today the failure of this
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
417 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

rulingsystemhasbeenclearlyexposedeventothe
common people. So the people have demanded
democratic changes. Yet the ruling classes are
protectingtheiroutdatedstructureonthestrength
of their guns. The contradiction between the
demand for democratic changes and the outdated
structurehasbecomemoreandmoresharp.Firstof
all, the ruling classes have used force/violence
indiscriminately. So the force/violence becomes a
very important aspect of the political agenda. It
cannot be denied that the ruling classes have
imposedanundeclaredwaronthepeopleofIndia.

The ongoing agrarian revolutionary struggles of

Andhra,Jharkhand,BiharandDandakaranyaandin
otherpartsofthecountrytooarethemaintargetsof
attackoftherulingclasses.Themilitantstrugglesof
theworkersandthetoilingmassesandthestruggles
for the right to selfdetermination and other
struggles ofthepeopleofvariousnationalitiesare
also their targets of attack. The exploiting classes
have deployed,apart frompolice,varioustypesof
ParamilitaryforcesliketheCRPF,BSF,Commando
forces and also vast military forces for the
suppressionofthesestruggles.

On the other hand, their need for sharpening the

repressive statemachinery has increased manifold.
Inthiscontext,theyhavebroughtforththePOTA,a
new and more draconianlawthan TADA,andthe
repeal ofPOTAbythe UPAGovt.hasnomeaning
sinceitwasreincarnatedintheformoftheUnlawful
Activities (Amendment) Act, 1965, with the very
purposeofthwartingandrepressingtherisingtide
of the genuine revolutionary peoples movements,
along with other peoples movements and the
nationality struggles as also those of the religious
and other minorities. They have also started
clamping down on the mass organizations of the
people of Nepali origin, residingin India for their
livelihood, by using this law. Many state
governmentsofdifferentbrands,includingAndhra
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
418 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Pradesh,Chhatisgarhhavebroughtforththeirown
antipeoplelawsofasimilarnature,underdifferent
namesandpretexts.

Apartfromthis,manystategovernmentshavebeen
carryingonbrutalrepressionthroughencirclement
and suppression campaigns to arrest and
exterminate the onward march of the peoples
revolutionary movements advancing along the just
path of Protracted Peoples War directed against
smashing the most exploitative, oppressive and
completelyundemocraticstatesystem,representing
imperialismandfeudalismandtherebyestablishing
anewdemocraticIndia,byadvancingonestepafter
the another. In their suppression campaigns, the
policeandotherparamilitaryforcesareconducting
combing operations by encircling the villages and
thus torturing people on a mass scale. They
demolishpeasantshouses,lootingeverythinginthe
nameofdecree,rapingwomenandkillingpeasants
byfiringindiscriminately.Theykillthesympathizers,
activists and the leaders of the movement after
arrestingtheminthefalsenameofencounters.The
killings of such brave sons and daughters of the
people in fake encounters have become an
undeclared law of the Indian ruling classes.
Accordingly, the role of a judge and assassin has
been assigned to the police forces. Moreover, they
haveestablishedaJointcommandcentreofmany
states, under the direct command of the central
Govt. to coordinate and carry out their vicious
repressionagainstthesemovements.

The police and military forces are suppressing the

movements for selfdetermination and for
democratic rights of the various nationalities. In
various parts of the country, people belonging to
politically economically and culturally backward
nationalities, such as Uttarakhand, Jharkhand,
Telanagana,Gorkhalandetc.arecarryingouttheir
struggles for liberation from extreme exploitation
andrepression.Atpresentthestruggleinthetribal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
419 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

areasofthecountryhasgotagreatmomentumand
reached a higher form with an aim to transform
Jharkhand into Lalkhand. The struggles of the
nationalitiesinKashmir,Nagaland,Manipur,Assam
and Tripura are being subjected to inhuman
oppressionbythegovernmentofIndia.TheIndian
forces have killed over 90 thousands Kashmiris to
suppressthemovementofthepeopleofKashmirfor
selfdetermination. They have also butchered
thousands of youth in Punjab with the false
accusation of terrorism. In spite of all these, the
struggles of the nationality people are marching
forward.

The ruling classes are plunging even the ordinary

mass movements of the Indian peoples into
bloodshed.Theyhavepromulgateddraconianlaws
tosuppresstheordinarymassactivitieslikerallies,
public meetings, mass mobilizations and strikes of
the workers etc. and also banned some mass
organizations.InAndhraPradesh,theworkersofthe
Singareni coalmines have been tortured and
attackedbythepoliceforalongperiodoftimeand
theleadersandactivistsofworkersmovementhave
beenkilledinfakeencounters.InBihar,thepeoples
movementsagainsttheverdictofdeathsentenceon
five peasants, allegedly linked with the Bara &
Bhabhuacase,hadbeenruthlesslysuppressedbythe
policewithlathisandbullets.Inthestrugglingareas
ofAndhra,Jharkhand,BiharandDandakaranyaas
wellasintheareasofthenationalitystrugglethe
mass movements on election boycott have faced
severe attacks, let loose by the police and Para
militaryforces.Thespontaneousmovementsofthe
peopleinTamilNadu,Karnataka,Maharashtra,West
Bengal,Haryana,Rajasthan,OrissaandotherStates
ofthecountry,havealsobeenruthlesslysuppressed
by the state machinery. All these struggles of the
people are continuously developing to the higher
stagebycombatingthesesuppressions.

Astheculminationofallthesedifferentstylesand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
420 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

formsofstruggleofthepeople,anembryonicform
ofthenewpeoplesstatehasbeenmanifesteditself
inAndhra,JharkhandBiharandDandakaranya.The
peasantsoftheseareashavebeenlaunchingthese
struggles on the basis of the slogan Land to the
tiller and All powers to the Peasant Committee,
andaccordingtothelawwherethereisrepression,
there is resistance. The peasants are confiscating
the land, removable properties, and arms and
ammunitions of the landlords. They are
promulgating and establishing their own law and
authority.Theyarepunishingthetyrants,zamindars,
jotedars, ringleaders of hooligans, and the police
agents after putting them on trial in the Peoples
Courts.Thepeasantsarewagingadevelopedform
of resistance struggle against the torture and
onslaughts of the private armies of the landlords,
and of the police and Paramilitary forces. In the
areas of peasant struggle of Andhra, Jharkhand,
Bihar and Dandakaranya, the clash between the
police & Paramilitary forces and the people have
becomeaneverydayfeature.

WHO ARE THE ENEMIES? WHO ARE THE

FRIENDS?

WhoaretheenemiesoftheIndianpeople?

Thereisnodoubtthatimperialismistheenemyof
theIndianpeople.Theyareplunderingtheimmense
wealthofourcountryanddictatingtermsinevery
sphereofoursociallife.Therefore,theimperialists
ofallcountries,particularlyUSimperialism,arethe
enemiesoftheIndianpeople.

Thecompradorbigbourgeoisiewhohavebetrayed
the interest of our country and people and have
completely capitulated to the imperialists are also
theenemiesofthepeople.

Inthecountrysidethezamindars,jotedars,usurers,
moneylenders and big dishonest businessmen are
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
421 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

theenemiesofthepeople.

In a word, imperialism, the comprador big

bourgeoisieandfeudalismarethemainenemiesof
ourcountryandthepeople.

WhoarethefriendsoftheIndianpeople?

Theworkingclassandthepeasantry,especiallythe
poorandlandlesspeasantsarethemainforceofthe
struggleagainstimperialist andfeudalexploitation
and oppression. They feel the most urgently
necessityfortherevolutionarychangeofsociety.The
middlepeasantisaresolutefriendofthisstruggle.
Therichpeasant,asfarastheircontradictionwith
imperialism is concerned, is also an ally of this
struggle. The students, youth, intellectuals, the
pettybourgeoisie like government and semi
government employees, teachers, lawyers, doctors,
engineers, writers, artists and all other toiling
massesarethefriendsandimportantforcesofthis
struggle.Thenationalbourgeoisieareavacillating
forcebuttheyarealsoourfriendsinantiimperialist
struggle.

OURAIMSANDTASKS

The RDF desires that the people of India liberate

themselves from the clutches of exploitation and
oppression from imperialism, the comprador
bourgeoisie and feudalism. The RDF wants the
abolitionofthisexploitativeandoppressivesystem.
So it raises the slogan Rise, Resist and
LiberatetocreateanewdemocraticIndia.

The RDF with its utmost capability will wage

resolute struggle against feudal and imperialist
exploitation, atrocities and oppression. If the
struggle is not to be confined to the limits of the
parliamentary sphere and if the revolutionary
struggle is tobe uninterruptedly continued,it will
notbeadequatetomerelywagethestruggleagainst
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
422 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

feudal and imperialist exploitation, atrocity and

oppression only, rather we have to advance our
thinkingforbuildingarevolutionarystruggleforthe
totaleradicationoffeudalismandimperialism.Ifwe
startourstruggleagainstexploitationandrepression
with this spirit, the struggle willbe more resolute
and its power of resistances will be increased
manifold. So, to rouse the people with the
consciousness of resistance struggles and to make
themreallyfittoparticipateinthisstruggle,theRDF
upholds the path of Naxalbari i.e., the path of
Andhra, Jharkhand, Bihar and Dandakaranya. The
RDFwillconductintensiveandmassivepropaganda
highlightingthispathandwillhelpthesestruggles
ineverypossibleway.

NEWDEMOCRATICINDIA

The RDF will build up various types of peoples

resistance struggles in support to those resistance
struggles which are now going on to build a new
democratic India, eradicating the exploitation and
rule of imperialism and feudalism. Having
coordinatedallthesestruggles,thenewdemocratic
andindependentIndia,intruestsenseoftheterm,
will be built up. On the basis of the above
mentioned spirit the RDF will build up powerful
antiimperialist and antifeudal resistance
movements with the aim of establishing a new
democratic India. In this way the real power of
ruling the country will come into the hands of
exploitedandoppressedpeoplei.e.tothehandsof
therealdemocraticpeoplesofIndia.Followingthis
pathofstruggle,RDFwillbuildupnewdemocratic
politics,aneweconomyandanewcultureinIndia,
where imperialist and feudal exploitation and
oppressionwillbeeradicated.Thepeoplewillenjoy
real independence and democratic rights. The
workingclasswillbecomefreefromtheexploitation
ofimperialismandthecompradorbourgeoisie.The
peasantswillhavetheirland,dignityandrights.The
problem of unemployment, food, education and
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
423 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

healthwillbesolved.Thepeoplewillensuretheir
rightstolive withdignity.Thetorturesonwomen
will be stopped and the women will enjoy equal
rights. Caste oppression and communalism will be
abolished, and the social repression on the dalits,
particularlyuntouchability,willcometoanend.The
people of different nationalities will achieve their
emancipation from exploitation and oppression. A
democraticandrevolutionarycultureofthepeople
willbebuiltup.

PROGRAMME

TheRDFwillorganizeandwageresistancestruggles
alongtheorientationoftheabovementionedaims
and objectives on the basis of the following
program:

1.TheRDFwillresolutelysupportallsortsofanti
feudal and antiimperialiststrugglesofthepeople.
InIndia,theworkingclassandpeasantryconstitute
the vast majority of the population. It is the anti
feudalandantiimperialiststrugglesoftheworking
class and peasantry, particularly of the poor and
landless peasants, that lays the foundation for the
revolutionarychangesofthesocialsystemofIndia.
TheRDFwillnotonlysupportallthesestrugglesbut
extendallsortsofhelpandcooperationtodevelop
themaswell.

2. The RDF knows that in smashing the old and

building a truly new India, the genuine peoples
revolutionaryforcescannotutilizetheparliamentary
platform by any means in building the powerful
peoples revolutionary movement. Hence, from the
verybeginning,theRDFwillnot onlyopposeand
exposethissystem,butalsocontinuetobuildupthe
BoycottElectionmovementalongwithresolutely
advancing the resistance struggle. RDF will build
andcontinuetodevelopthismovementonthebasis
of the slogan Election boycott is a democratic
right.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
424 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

3.InIndiaimperialismexistsandrestsonthebase
offeudalism.TheRDFtherefore,callsuponallthe
antiimperialistresistancestrugglestostandbythe
ongoingagrarianrevolutionarystrugglesinAndhra,
Jharkhand, Bihar, and Dandakaranya in order to
abolishthefeudalexploitationandoppression.Only
inthiswaycanweliberateourselvesalsofromthe
yokeofimperialistexploitationandoppression.

4.TheRDFwillexertitsutmostefforttoorganize
and wage widespread mass movement against
imperialismandtheconspiraciesandmachinations
of the World Bank and IMF controlled by the
imperialistforces,ledbyUSimperialism. TheRDF
fightsagainsttheWTOregimebeingimplementedin
the country builds a struggle demanding the
withdrawalofIndiafromWTOintoto.andTheRDF
willalsobuildupstrongmassmovementsmobilising
allantiimperialistforcesofthecountryagainstthe
polices of all the new imperialistdictated policies
like the New Economic Policy, New Industrial
Policy, Retrenchment and Voluntary Retirement
Policythroughthegoldenhandshake,etc.ofthe
Indiangovernment.Atthesametimeitwillexpose
theactivitiesofdifferentNGOsandthetreacherous
and proimperialist character of different reformist
andrevisionistparties.

5. The RDF will carry on resolute resistance

strugglesagainstpricerise,inflation,retrenchment,
privatization,andcorruptionetc.

6. The RDF will organize and wage resistance

struggleagainstimperialistandfeudalculture.

7.TheRDFwilllendresolutesupportandprovide
withallsortsofhelptothewomensmovementsin
demand of their right to equality and against
patriarchal domination, trafficking of women and
young girls within India and abroad, rape and
molestation,killingofbrides,dowrysystem,andall
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
425 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

typesofatrocitiesonwomen,etc.Atthesametime
it will oppose bourgeois feminism and whole
heartedly support the movements launched for
genuinewomensliberation.

8. The RDF will resolutely support the mass

movements against caste oppression and
discrimination against the oppressed castes and
particularly upon the dalits. It will vehemently
opposeallformsofuntouchabilityagainstdalitsand
support theirfight for equalrights andforspecial
privileges,includingreservationfordalitsandother
backwardcastes.

9.TheRDFwilllaunchcampaignfororganizinga
widespread public opinion against communalism,
casteism, racial hatred, fundamentalism and
religiousfanaticism,particularlyHindufanaticism.It
will isolate and defeat the Hindu fascist forces;
concentratetheattacksinparticularontheBJP,RSS,
VHP, Bajrang Dal, Shiv Sena and other Hindu
chauvinist and fascist organisations. Support the
struggleofthereligiousminoritiesagainsttheHindu
chauvinistpoliciesoftheIndianState.TheRDFwill
carry on resolute struggle against the divide and
rule policy of the exploiting classes and
parliamentarypartiesandalsoagainsttheirpolicyof
harbouring communal riots. Simultaneously, the
RDF will organize a widespread public opinion
againstallsortsofdeception,bluffandinstigationof
the parliamentary parties and of all types of
fundamentalistforces.

10.TheRDFwillsupportthestudentsmovements
initsdemandofintroducingascientificeducation
systemagainsttheexistingsemicolonialandsemi
feudal one. The RDF will resolutely support the
students movement against the new education
policyofthegovt.ofIndia,againsttheprivatization
and commercialization of education and also in
favouroftheirotherdemocraticdemands.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
426 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

11.Theorganisedsectoroftheworkingclassinthe
country is still in the grip of revisionists. The
growingrevolutionarymovementacrossthecountry
began to show its impact on the workers. The
workers face worst type of exploitation under the
liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation. The
fight of the workers against wagecuts, contract
labour,goldenshakehands,lockouts,etc.issteadily
gaining momentum. The revolutionary vanguard
roleoftheworkingclasswillassumeitsplacemore
and more in the context of the growing labour
unrestinthecountry.TheRDFshallinvolveinthe
working class struggles and try to bridge and
amalgamate the fast developing struggles workers
andpeasants.

12.TheRDFwillnotonlylendresolutesupportto
the struggles for establishing the right to self
determinationofthepeopleofallnationalitiesand
totheirmovementsforotherdemocraticdemands,
butwillalsoprovidethemallsortsofhelp.

13. Adivasis constitute 10% of Indian population.

Theyhavebeencontinuouslywaginglargerstruggle
againstthecolonialandimperialistoccupationand
appropriationoftheirforest,landandothernatural
recourses. Mining, industry, big dams and other
projects brought out by the Indian ruling classes
displacedmillionsofAdivasisfromtheirnativesoil
without any rehabilitation and providing any
securitytothem.TherecentonslaughtonAdivasis
reached highest proportions. Millions more are
goingtobedisplacedwithlargeamountsofforeign
capital entering these areas for exploitation of
naturalresources.TheRDFstandsforthecomplete
rightsofAdivasis ontheirforestsanditsproduce.
RDF is completely opposed to any kind of
displacement Adivasis from their immediate
environment and believes no amount of
compensationcanrehabilitatethem.

14.TheIndianrulingclasseshavebeenunleashing
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
427 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

barbarous state repression on the agrarian

revolutionarystrugglesinAndhra,Jharkhand,Bihar
and Dandakaranya as well as on the nationality
movements and on the democratic movements of
thepeople.

The RDF will resolutely lend support to the just

strugglesofthesepeopleandwillorganizeandwage
aresoluteresistancestruggleagainstthebrutalstate
repressionandwhiteterrorism.

15.TheRDFwilllendresolutesupporttotheanti
imperialist movement of the toiling masses of all
strataincludingworkers,peasants,students,youth,
women,dalits,intellectuals,artists,writers,doctors,
engineers, teachers, handicraft people, etc. Being
attachedasapartandparcelwiththesestruggles,
theRDFwilladvancetowardsthepathofantifeudal
and antiimperialist new Democratic Revolution to
build up a happy, prosperous, independent and
democraticIndia.

16. The RDF will extend resolute support to the

revolutionary struggles of the working class,
peasantry and other toiling masses and the
liberationmovementsofthenationalitypeopleofall
countries of the globe and wage a solidarity
movementagainsttherepressiononthesestruggles.
Besidesitwillresolutelysupportpeoplesresistance
struggleagainstexpansionismofIndiaandoppose
the expansionistpolicyofIndiaintheIndian sub
continentatthegestureofimperialism.

17.TheRDFwillcontinuetoextendaresoluteand
practical support to all the revolutionary
movements, including the genuine national
liberation movements directed against the world
imperialist system which are going on and
developingandwhichmayemergeindifferentparts
of the globe. It will extend this support by using
various methods and particularly organizing
solidarity movements in their support and against
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
428 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

the repression on the movements of the Peruvian,

Philippine, Turkish and Nepali people. It will lend
particular support to the Peoples War in Nepal,
directed not only against imperialism but also
against Indian expansionism. As a part of it and
separately, it will continue to expose and oppose
Indianexpansionism,nurturedbyimperialism.This
factor,alongwithsomeotherfactors,servesasthe
basisofcloserrelationshipbetweenthepeopleand
therevolutionarystruggleofthetwocountries.

The people of India have been living under semi

colonial,semifeudalruleforalongperiodoftime.
The state machineryisruthlesslysuppressingeven
thetradeuniontypeofordinarymovementsofthe
peopleforminimumdemocraticdemands.Insucha
condition,tofulfilandaccomplishthehighertasks
ofthemassmovements,andtomeetwiththeneeds
for the development of struggle and organization,
weconstitutetheRDF.Sotheleadersandcadresof
theRDFmustbepoliticallydetermined,enthusiastic
insacrificingtheirselfinterestandevendedicating
theirlivesandtobeboldenoughtowageresistance
struggles.Onlythen,wewillbeabletoadvancethe
resistancestrugglesinIndia.

Greatermassesofdemocraticandprogressiveforces
have tobe involvedinourprograms.Wemustbe
wellversedinadoptingcorrectandflexiblepolicies
andmethodsinjointactivities.TheRDFwilltryits
besttouniteintheantiimperialistandantifeudal
struggle with those individuals and organizations
who oppose the parliamentary path, support the
revolutionarystrugglesandopposestaterepressions.
The RDF will unite with others too in issuebased
jointactivitiesbyformingaplatformlikePeoples
Action Committees. The RDF will unite with the
worldproletariat,oppressedcountries,nationsand
people,andwillfullysupporttheirantiimperialist
strugglesandalsobuildupsolidaritymovementin
favourofthesestruggles.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
429 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

WearegoingtoformRDFtoachieveanalternative
to the persisting semifeudal, semicolonial rule,
mobilising the vast majority of the people who
aspire for a genuine democratic political setup,
whichensuresnotonlythedemocraticrightsofthe
people but also the free and independent
development of the economy. The RDF will stand
wholeheartedly in support of the peoples
revolutionary struggles which are advancing and
spreadingtodifferentpartsofthecountrytofulfil
suchamission.

The RDF will also support peoples/national

democratic movements throughout the world
againsttheglobalimperialistsystem.Itwillorganise
solidarity movements in support of these
movements.

Draft
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)

CONSTITUTION
Article1.NameoftheOrganisation
a)RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)inEnglish.

b)KratikariJanwadiMorcha(RDF)inHindi

c)Indifferentstatesthenameoftheorganisation
should be written in the respective languages but
RDFshouldbekeptwithinbrackets.

Article2.LogoandFlagoftheOrganisation
Colour of the flag is red. There is a symbol of
clenchedhandwithatornfetterinthemiddleofthe
flag.AboveitareinscribedthewordsRise,Resist
andLiberatewhileRDF,theabbreviatednameof
theorganization,istobestuddedbelow.Thesizeof
theflagshouldbe2:3inwidthandlength.

Article3.Areaofwork
The organisation has a perspective to work at all
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
430 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Indialevelbyhavingcommitteesformedatthelevel
ofallstatesinIndia.

Article4.Membership
a) Any individual who attains the age of 18 and
acceptstheManifestoandConstitutioncanjoinasa
member. And the organisations, which accept the
programme and constitution, can also join as
members.

b) Imperialist/government funded organisations or

individuals who are part ofpolicymakingofsuch
organisationsshallnotbeadmittedasmembers.

c)MembershipfeeforallorganisationsRs.1000/
per annum, for individual memberRs.100/ per
annum.

Article7.OrganisationalStructure
a) A central executive committee of RDF will be
formed.Delegatesofrepresentativeorganizationsof
differentprovinceswillbeelectedasmembersofthe
centralexecutivecommitteethroughtheconference.
Notmorethan10%ofanycommitteeofRDFwill
haveindividualsasitsmembers.

b) The representative organizations of different

provinces of the RDF may have an independent
name.

c)Stateunitswhichfunctionwithadifferentname
willwriteaStateUnitofRDFunderitsname.

d) The central executive committee will lead the

organizationontheprincipleofconsensus.

e) At the central level, there will be an AllIndia

ExecutiveCommittee(EC).ItwillbeelectedbyAll
Indiaconference.

f)Therewillbestatelevelcommitteeselectedbythe
conferences.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
431 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

g) The central executive committee will elect a

president,vicepresident,asecretary,threeassistant
secretariesandatreasurer.

Article8.Meetings
a)TheECmembersoftheAllIndiaCommitteeshall
meetonceineverythreemonths.

Article 9. Rights and responsibilities of office

bearers
a)ThepresidentshallpresideovertheECmeetings
andofficebearersmeetings.

b) The vicepresident shall preside over these

meetingsintheabsenceofthepresident.

c) The general secretary in consultation with the

presidentcallsforthemeetingsoftheofficebearers
andtheEC.

d) The joint secretaries help the general secretary

andcarriesonthedutiesofthegeneralsecretaryin
his/herabsence.

e)Thetreasurerkeepsaccountsandpresentstothe
ECs,andtotheconference.

f)Thegeneralsecretaryisthechiefexecutiveofthe
organisation.

g) The president is the chief spokesperson of the

organisation.

Article10.Discipline
a)RDFarrivesatdecisionsdemocraticallythrough
majorityvoteinallcommittees.

b) All the lower committees shall implement the

decisionsoftheAllIndiacommittee.

c) From the platform of the organisation or any

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
432 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

unitedfront,committeemembersatalllevelsshall
expressonlythestandoftheorganisation.

d) Disciplinary action can be taken against those

whoactagainsttheManifestoandtheConstitution
of the organisation or the decisions of the
committees. Efforts must be made to solve the
problems internally through democratic processes.
Expulsion from the organisation is the ultimate
action, which can be awarded only after all
precautionsarestrictlytaken.

e)Thedifferencesandconflictsamongthemember
organisationsshouldnotbeopenlyexpressedfrom
thedaisofRDForanypublicdais.

Article11.Magazine
a) On behalf of the organisation, an English
magazine called Peoples Resistance and Hindi
magazinecalledJanPrtirodhshouldbebroughtout
atthecentrallevel.

b)Organsinotherlanguagesmayalsobepublished

c)TheExecutiveCommitteeshallappointeditorial
board/sforthemanagementofthemagazines.

Article13.Funds
a)Forfunds,theorganisationshoulddependonthe
members,memberorganisations,andthepeople.

b)Allpublicationsshouldbeselfsupporting.

c)TheAllIndiacommitteeshouldacquirefundsfor
its requirements, in cooperation with the state
committees.Thefundsacquiredbystatecommittees
shallbedistributedintheratioof25:75forallIndia,
statecommittees.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
433 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Article14.ChangeofConstitution
The Manifesto and the Constitution can be
amended/changed if necessary by the all India
Conferenceby2/3majority.

Article15.Conference
Theconferenceoftheorganizationistobeheldat
anintervalofthreeyears,thoughthetimelimitmay
varyasperthespecificityofthesituation.

OURAIMSANDTASKS

The RDF desires that the people of India liberate

themselves from the clutches of exploitation and
oppression from imperialism, the comprador
bourgeoisie and feudalism. The RDF wants the
abolitionofthisexploitativeandoppressivesystem.
So it raises the slogan Rise, Resist and
LiberatetocreateanewdemocraticIndia.

The RDF with its utmost capability will wage

resolute struggle against feudal and imperialist
exploitation, atrocities and oppression. If the
struggle is not to be confined to the limits of the
parliamentary sphere and if the revolutionary
struggle is tobe uninterruptedly continued,it will
notbeadequatetomerelywagethestruggleagainst
feudal and imperialist exploitation, atrocity and
oppression only, rather we have to advance our
thinkingforbuildingarevolutionarystruggleforthe
totaleradicationoffeudalismandimperialism.Ifwe
startourstruggleagainstexploitationandrepression
with this spirit, the struggle willbe more resolute
and its power of resistances will be increased
manifold. So, to rouse the people with the
consciousness of resistance struggles and to make
themreallyfittoparticipateinthisstruggle,theRDF
upholds the path of Naxalbari i.e., the path of
Andhra, Jharkhand, Bihar and Dandakaranya. The
RDFwillconductintensiveandmassivepropaganda
highlightingthispathandwillhelpthesestruggles
ineverypossibleway.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
434 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

In the said document aims and tasks of

Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) are
mentionedasunder:

AIMSANDTASKS

The RDF desires that the people of India liberate

themselves from the clutches of exploitation and
oppression from imperialism, the comprador
bourgeoisie and feudalism. The RDF wants the
abolitionofthisexploitativeandoppressivesystem.
So it raises the slogan Rise, Resist and
LiberatetocreateanewdemocraticIndia.

The RDF with its utmost capability will wage

resolute struggle against feudal and imperialist
exploitation, atrocities and oppression. If the
struggle is not to be confined to the limits of the
parliamentary sphere and if the revolutionary
struggle is to be uninterruptedly continued,it will
notbeadequatetomerelywagethestruggleagainst
feudal and imperialist exploitation, atrocity and
oppression only, rather we have to advance our
thinkingforbuildingarevolutionarystruggleforthe
totaleradicationoffeudalismandimperialism.Ifwe
startourstruggleagainstexploitationandrepression
with this spirit, the struggle willbe more resolute
and its power of resistances will be increased
manifold. So, to rouse the people with the
consciousness of resistance struggles and to make
themreallyfittoparticipateinthisstruggle,theRDF
upholds the path of Naxalbari i.e., the path of
Andhra, Jharkhand, Bihar and Dandakaranya. The
RDFwillconductintensiveandmassivepropaganda
highlightingthispathandwillhelpthesestruggles
ineverypossibleway.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
435 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

534] From the above aims and tasks, it is clear that RDF, a
frontalorganizationofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)upholdsthe
path of Naxalbari i.e., the path of Andhra, Jharkhand, Bihar and
Dandakaranyaanditwillconductintensiveandmassivepropaganda
highlightingthispathandwillhelpthesestrugglesineverypossible
way.

535] Further, from the said document it reveals that RDF

followed Naxalbari which illuminated the path of the Indian
revolutionandopenedanewchapterinthehistoryofthepeasant
struggle in India and the struggle of Naxalbari brought a
revolutionarymassstruggle.FurtherRDFcriticizeagainsttheIndian
Judiciarybysayingthatjudiciaryisnotconsistentwiththeprovisions
of the Indian Constitution and in the areas of Andhra, Zarkhand,
Bihar and Dandakarnya the people have raised the slogan that
boycottofelectionsisademocraticrightandthismovementhas
expanded to a wider area facing the onslaughts of the police and
cadresofelectoralparties.Further,inthesaiddraftbelowthehead
DraftRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)Constitutionthatthe
nameoforganisationare(a)RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)
inEnglish.(b)KrantikariJanwadiMorcha(RDF)inHindiand(c)In
differentstatesthenameoftheorganisationshouldbewritteninthe
respectivelanguagesbutRDFshouldbekeptwithbrackets.

536] Art.160 having path ex 23/ALLL/Accommodation

issue/Letters/LettertotheGeneralSecretaryofCPIMaoist,isa
letteraddressedtotheGeneralSecretaryCommunistPartyofIndia
(Maoist) wherein further mentioned that We are aware that this
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
436 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

militaryoffensivehasallthecharacteristicsofgenocidetohavebeen
launched on the tribal people of these regions and simultaneously
targetedagainstyourpartyandotherpeople'sorganizations.Atthe
endofthisletterthenameofaccusedno.6Saibabaisappearing.

537] Art.161 having path ex 4/6 Dec 2011/others/Fact

findingreportonthekillingofCPIMaoistPolitbureaumember
KishenjititledasStatementonthekillingofCPI(Maoist)Polibureau
memberKishenjitakenoutfromtheharddiskExh.4,seizedfromthe
house of you accused under seizure panchanama (Exh.165) dated
December 3, 2011 is a Fact Finding Report by Coordination of
Democratic Rights Organization, wherein it is observed that,
Consideringtheextentofthedamagecausedtothebodyagainstthe
ratherundisturbedsurroundingofthespotwherethebodylayraises
oursuspicionabouttheofficialversion.Thereportedofficialversion
themselvessufferfrominconsistencies.Foreg.WhereasChiefMinister
Mamta Bannerjee claimed that for three days a Kishanji and his
companionswereencircledandtheywereaskedtosurrender,butthe
villagers deny having heard any public announcement over loud
speaker of any kind much less asking him to surrender. Mr Vijay
KumarDGofCRPFwentonrecordon25thNovemberthatKishanji
alongwiththreeotherswerekilledinanencounterwhereasonlya
singlebodywasfound!Thereportednumberofbulletsfiredsaidto
beseveralhundredinthecourseof1530minutelongencounterdo
notcorrespondtothespotwherehisbodylay.Attheendofthisfact
findingreportitisdemandedasunder:
1] Anindependentjudicialinquiryheadedbya
sittingorretiredSupremeCourtorHighCourtjudge
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
437 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

intocircumstancessurroundingKishanji'sdeath.
2] Registeracriminalcaseundersection302I.P.C

538] Art.162 seized from the house of accused no.6 Saibaba

underseizurepanchanama(Exh.165)havingpathex4/8Nov,2011/
CRPP/CRPP Old Files/Brochure final/More messages Political
prisoners, is a letter addressedtoThe Principal Secretary(Home)
Uttarakhand Government Dehradon which is sent by accused no.4
PrashantRahibelowthatMaoistPrisonersTamilNaduiswrittenand
it is mentioned that, We hope the Committee for the Release of
PoliticalPrisonerswillworkfortherecognitionofPoliticalPrisoners
and brings the right of freedom of Expression of opinions by the
peoplewithoutbeingthreatened.

539] Art.163 seized from the house of accused no.6 Saibaba

underseizurepanchanama(Exh.165)havingpathex4/CRPP/CRPP
Oldfiles/Brochurefinal/EDITED/ProfilePrashantRahiEdited,is
adocumenttitledasPrashantRahiwithphotographofaccusedno.4
PrashantRahiwhereinitismentionedaboutarrestofaccusedno.4
PrashantRahion15thDec2007inDeharadun.

540] Art.164havingpath Ex3/Ritu/AllDownloads/Letter2

AllILPSMemberorganisations300611(1)isaletteraddressedto
All ILPS Member Organisations, and further stated that Dear
ComradesandFriends,andalsomentionedInfact,thecallforthe
ICC meeting of November 2009 was based on the request of the
Deputy Chairperson of ILPS, GN Saibaba (accused no.6 Saibaba),
fromIndia.Hehadaskedforthisgatheringinordertoreportonthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
438 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

progressandtodiscusstheplansforamajorinternationalprojectto
behostedinIndia.Thiswasaprojectthathewasleadingonbehalf
oftheILPSastheregionalcoordinatorforSouthAsiaandanofficer
oftheICC.

PhotographsshowingtheactivitiesrelatingtoRDFamongstthe
pageNos.1to247ofExh.267

1] In the photographatpage no.36ofExh.267

taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.3/new folder (2)/all metters
I/photos/11.5.07, photono.IMG_3162aposterof
DSU is seen regarding freedom for Kashmir,
Nagalim,Manipur,Assam,Eelum,Palestine.

2] In the photographatpage no.38ofExh.267

taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.3/new folder(II)/All metters
I/photos/Utt.RDF convention photos/rdf, photo
no. 3827/3828, accusedno.3 Hem Mishraisseen
onstagesingingsongwithinstrumentinconvention
ofRDFUttarakhand.

3] In the photographatpage no.39ofExh.267

taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.3/new folder (2)/all metters
I/photos/utt.rdf.convention photos.rdf wife of
accused no.4 Prashant Rahi, namely, Charulata is
seenaddressingtheconventionofRDFUttarakhand.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
439 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

4] Inthephotograph atpageno.40ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.3/new folder (2)/all metters I/photos/crpp
programmes, photono.4017,4042,4047 people
are seen attending the programme of National
Campaign Against Illegal Detention Organized by
CRPP.

5] In photograph at page no.135 of Exh.267

taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/All photos/photos many/political
programmes/conventiononTamils,accusedno.6
Saibaba is seen addressing from stage under the
banner The Unspoken Genocide: War crimes in
Srilanka.

6] In photograph at page no.143 of Exh.267

taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/All photos/photosTamil meeting photos,
accused no.6 Saibaba is seen sitting on stage in
publicmeetingonthesubjectSTOPTHEWAROF
GENOCIDE OF TAMILS IN SRILANKA, held at
DeputySpeaker,sHallConstitutionClubRafiMarg
NearParliamentStreetNewDelhiat28thAprilat
3.00p.m.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
440 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

7] Inthephotographatpageno.145ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/allphotos/photossai/newfolder1, photo
no.File023,024,027,accusedno.4PrashantRahi
is seen addressing a meeting of Revolutionary
Democratic Front supported by Telangana Praja
front.

8] Inthephotographatpageno.146ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/all photos/photos sai/new folder1,
accused no.4 Prashant Rahi is seen addressing a
meeting of Revolutionary Democratic Front
alongwith accused no.6 Saibaba supported by
TelanganaPrajafront.

9] Inthephotographatpageno.147ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/All photos/photos many/political
programmes/21.5.2011, GPF meeting against
army deployment, photo no. 100_9582/9583,
accused no.6 Saibaba is seen addressing public
meetingunderthebannerStopArmyEncroachment
inBastarOpposeIndianStatesWaronPeople,held
atGandhiPeaceFoundation,NewDelhi.

10] Inthephotographatpageno.148ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
441 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Exh.5/All photos/Prachanda, photo no. 1405,

accused no.6 Saibaba is seen along with Maoist
leader of Nepal Prachanda and Rona Wilson and
others.

11] Inthephotographatpageno.149ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/Allphotos/Prachanda, photono.100_1404,
wife of accused no.6 Saibaba, namely Vasanta is
seenalongwithMaoistleaderofNepalPrachanda.

12] In the photographat page no.150ofExh.267

taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/Allphotos/Prachanda,photono.100_1399,
accused no.6 Saibaba is seen along with Maoist
leaderofNepalandBaburamBhattarai.

13] In photograph at page no.151 of Exh.267

taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/Allphotos/CRPPconferencephotos,photo
no. DSCF7680, accused no.6 Saibaba is seen on
stageintheconferenceofcommitteefortherelease
ofpoliticalprisoners.

14] Inthephotographatpageno.152ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/Allphotos/photosmany/CRPPconference
photos/pictures, accused no.6 Saibaba is seen
alongwithRonaWilson.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
442 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

15] Inthephotographatpageno.153ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/All photos/photos many/ political
programmes/meeting/TIA ILPS, accused no.6
Saibabaisseenonstagewithsomeoftheforeigners
attending the 3rd International assembly of
internationalleagueofPeople'sStruggleILPSheld
atHongkong.

16] Inthephotographatpageno.154ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/All photos/photos many/political
programmes/meeting/TIA ILPS, accused no.6
Saibabaisseenalongwithsomeforeignerandone
IndianladySomaSen.

17] In photograph at page no.158 of Exh.267

taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/Allphotos/4Decconventionphotos,photo
no.2544, accused no.3 HemMishra isseen sitting
alongwithotheraudience.

18] Inthephotographatpageno.159ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/All photos/photos many/i phone photos,
photono.3172,accusedno.3HemMishraisseen
attending a meeting along with Rona Wilson and
AjayKumar.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
443 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

19] In photograph at page no.160 of Exh.267

taken out from the harddisk Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/All photos/photos many/iphone photos,
accusedno.6Saibabaisseenonstage.

Following are the personal photographs found in Arts.1 to 41

seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabainwhich
accusedno.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahiandno.6Saibaba
areseen.

1] In the personal photograph having path

Harddisc ex 3/C/new folder (2)/All metters
1/Hems photos/images, accused no.3 Hem
Mishra,whichwasfoundinpossessionofaccused
no.6 Saibaba and accused no.4 Prashant Rahi is
therealongwiththem.

2] In the personal photograph having path

Harddisc Exh.3/New folder (2)/All metters
1/Hem's photos/Images, which was seized from
accused Saibaba's house under panchanama at
Exh.165inwhichpersonalphotographofaccused
no.3 Hem Mishra, accused no.4 Prashant Rahi
andaccusedno.6areseen.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
444 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

PhotographsfoundinKodakcameraArt.30seizedfrompossession
ofaccusedno.3HemMishra.

541] Asdiscussedabove,whenthepersonalsearchofaccused
no.3 Hem Mishra was taken, from his possession Kodak camera
alongwithchargerwasseizedvidepanchanamaExh.137andtothat
effecttheevidenceofInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheand
panch P.W.1 SantoshBawne is clearandcogentandnotshaken in
crossexamination. TheKodakcameraalongwithchargerispartof
muddemalproperty. Hence,atthetimeofrecordingstatementu/s
313 of Cr.P.C. of accused no.3 Hem Mishra the camera of Kodak
companywasopenedalongwiththecharger(Art.30)beforethecourt
on the laptop of the Court in presence of the accused no.3 Hem
Mishra,hisAdvocateShriGadlingandSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathan.In
thecamerainalltherewereelevenphotosandallthesephotoswere
showntotheaccusedno.3HemMishraandquestionswereaskedto
himonalltheseelevenphotographs.Thedescriptionofphotographs
areasunder:

1]Infirstphotographthereare3memorycardsof8
GB,32GB and16GBofSandiskcompanyandsome
pendrivesalongwith memorycards.

2]Insecondphotographthereisfaceofsmallchild
around5years.

3]Inthirdphotographrearviewmirrorofthecaris
seen.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
445 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

4]Fourthphotographisblank,

5] In fifth photograph one girl around 15 to 20

yearsisseen.
6]Insixthphotographdashboardofacarisseen.

7]Inseventhphotographonepersonandagirlare
seen.

8] IneighthphotographonecarrybagofAccabois
seen.

9]Inninthphotographaccusedno.6G.N.Saibabais
seen sittingonwheelchair,

10] Intenth photographonegirlapproximately15

to20yearsisseen.

11] Ineleventh photographmapofIndiahanging

wallclockisseen.

542] All the above photographs are existed in the internal

memoryofthesaidcameraofKodakcompanyandthephotographsin
thecamerabeforetheCourtwereseenandrelevantquestionswere
puttotheaccusedno.3HemMishraandhence,inmyopinion,asthe
originalcameraisbeforetheCourtandphotographswereininternal
memory,itcanbereadinevidencewithoutthecertificateu/s65Bof
theIndianEvidenceAct.Hence,inviewofjudgmentofApexcourtin
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
446 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

AnvarP.V.v.P.K.BasheerreportedinAIR2015SC180 certificate
u/s65BoftheEvidenceActisnotnecessary.

543] Atthisjunctureitisnecessarytoconsiderratiolaiddown
inthecaseofPreetiJainv.KunalJainandanotherreportedinAIR
2016Rajasthan153itisobservedthat
FamilyCourtsAct(66of1984),S.14Evidence
Act (1 of 1872), Ss.65B, 122 Family Courts
proceedings Admissibility of electronic records
Husband seeking to produce video clippings
recordedthroughpinholecameraestablishingwife's
extra marital relationship Benefit of privileged
communicationsbetweenhusbandandwifeIsnot
available in Family Court proceedings Clipping
from pin hole camera with hard disk memory is
primary evidence Thus compliance of S.65B of
EvidenceActisnotnecessary.

Videoclipsfoundintheelectronicgadgets(Art.1to41)seized
from the house search of accused no.6 Saibaba showing
involvement of accused no.3 Hem Mishra, no.4 Prashant Rahi,
no.6Saibaba

544] Afterdiscussingtheincriminatingdocumentsfoundintext
form contained in electronic gadgets like memorycard of Sandisk
companyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishraand
Arts.no.1to41seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba,
it is necessary to discuss the videoclips showing the activities of
accusedno.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahiandno.6Saibaba.

Videoclipsinelectronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)seizedfromthe
housesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaunderseizurepanchanama
Exh.165inwhichaccusedno.6Saibabawasseen
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
447 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1] In videoclip having path Exh.3/films/

S1/RDF/1/video_TS, VTS _01_1 it is clear that
accusedno.6Saibabaisseentakingpartandothers
aresingingsongondeathofShankarandsinging
slogansLalSalamLalSalam.

2] In videoclip having path Exh.3/films/S1

/RDF/1/video_TS,VTS_01_1 venueandstageof
1st conferenceofRDFisshownandonebanneris
seen on which it is written as STOP OPERATION
GREEN HUNT RDF WITHDRAW THE ARMED
FORCESFROMBASTAR,ONTHEGATEBANNERIT
IS WRITTEN REVOLUTIONARY DEMOCRATIC
FRONT(RDF) ALL INDIA1ST CONFERENCE 2223
APRIL 2012 HYDERABAD TELANGANA, BELOW
STAGETHEREAREBANNERSSHAHIDCOMRADE
NAGINAMAJHEE MANCH, ON STAGE THERE IS
BANNER OF REVOLUTIONARY DEMOCRATIC
FRONT(RDF) ALL INDIA 1ST CONFERENCE 2223
APRIL 2012 SUNDARAYYA VIGNANA BHAWAN
BAGHKINGAMPALLY HYDERABAD TELANGANA,
and accused no.6 Saibaba is entering the venue
amidstbeatsofdrums.

3] In videoclip having path Exh.3/films

/S1/RDF/ 1/ video_TS, VTS _01_1 slogans are
givenforShahidSheshannaandpeoplearesinging
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
448 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

TUMKOLALSALAMSATHI.Inthisvideoclipone
ladyMaaMalammaisunveilingmemorialpillarfor
amar shahid and accused no.6 Saibaba is seen
presentandgivingslogans.

4] In videoclip having path Exh.3 /films

/s1/RDF/1/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2,thedignitaries
from different parts including accused no.6 G.N.
Saibaba is seen on dais, and addressed as Dy.
Secretary,RDFbelowthebannerofRDFalongwith
others.

5] Invideoclipatpath Exh.3/films/s1/RDF/
1/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3, RDF magazine
Janpratirodh is shown to audience by one of the
sikhpersonsitingonthedais.

6] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/1/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1, somegentsandladies
raised the slogans as Shahidonko Lal Salam,
Navjanwadi Kranti Zindabad, Ek Hi Rasta Ek Hi
RastaNaxalbariEkHiRasta..

7] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/2/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1,accusedno.6Saibabais
seenspeakingabouttheKashmiripeoplesstruggle
forfreedomandgaveassurancethatRDFisnotonly
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
449 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

supportingthemovementbuttakesactivepartand
their main concern is to liberate the Kashmir and
further accused no.6 Saibaba have stated that the
struggleforliberationofKashmirandourliberation
arethesame.

9] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/2/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1, the dignitaries from
differentpartsincludingaccusedno.6G.N.Saibaba
is seen on dais along with Sayad Gilani, and
explainingaboutthemanifestoofRDFandfurther
accused no.6 Saibaba have seen supporting the
Navjanvadi Kranti, further he have invited Arun
Pareira to release the book SCRIPTING THE
CHANGE WRITTENBYANURADHAGANDHYand
hasreleasedthebook.

10] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/3/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3, the dignitaries from
differentpartsincludingaccusedno.6G.N.Saibaba
isseenondaisandspeakingaboutTelanganaand
givingacalltogivebloodforcreationofTelangana.

11] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/3/ VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1, the dignitaries from
different parts including accused no.6 Saibaba is
seen ondaisandspeakingaboutthemanifestoof
RDF,reportoflas7years,theareasofworkingof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
450 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

RDF and the purpose of RDF is to spread

revolutionaryideologyamongstthemasses.

12] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/3 /VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3, the dignitaries from
different parts including accused no.6 Saibaba is
seenondaisandhaveinvitedRonaWilsontoread
out the message fromNagaland.RonaWilson has
read the message from Nagaland regarding the
revolutionary struggle of the people of Nagaland,
Assam,KashmirEtc.andtheirsupporttoRDF.

13] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/3/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_4,accusedno.6Saibabais
seencallingComradeKalyanraotoreleasetheCD
prepared by Jananatya Mandali with title Dhruva
TaraintheconferenceofRDF.

14] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/4/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2,accusedno.6Saibabais
seen saying that the RDF completely reject the
parliamentary system and use of parliamentary
system and its electoral system and have further
stated that RDF manifesto clearly establishes that
this organization thinksthat naxalvadichange the
face of the politics of this country, the politics of
Indians of continent will remain the same after
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
451 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

naxalbari apprising happened, so naxalvadi ek hi

raasta,naxalvadiisonlywayisthecentralsloganas
per the RDF and other statements regarding
naxalbari.

15] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/4/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3,accusedno.6Saibabais
seensittingonthedaisaddressingthepeopleand
calling theirsuggestionsonmanifestoofRDFand
various persons has spoken from the dais about
manifesto.

16] In videoclip having path Exh.9/my

dvd/VTS_01_1 accused no.6 Saibaba seen
addressingthemeetingheldonKishanjiwherehe
also saying that he got inspiration from Kishanji
and further the meetingis held under the banner
QthZ eqBHksM vkSj gR;kds f[kykQ la;qDr dUosa'ku lanHkZ dk-
fd'kuth and nearthebanneronephotographofa
personinnaxaldressisseen.

17] In videoclip having path Exh.9/my

dvd/VTS_01_2 accused no.6 Saibaba is seen
addressing the aforesaid meeting on Kishanji and
accused no.6 Saibaba have offered tributes to
KishanjionbehalfofRDFandstatedthattheRDF
will continue with the revolutionary thoughts and
missionofKishanji.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
452 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

18] In videoclip having path Exh.7/Exh.71/

(1)DVD/ 091204/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3 accused
no.6Saibabaisseenonthestageintheconvention
against war on people held at Speaker's hall
Constitution Club Rafi Marg, New Delhi on 4th
December2009byForumAgainstWaronPeople.

19] In videoclip having path Exh.7/Exh.71/

(1)DVD/ 091204/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3 accused
no.6Saibaba isaddressingameeting Convention
against War on People held at Speaker's hall
Constitution Club Rafi Marg, New Delhi on 4th
December2009byForumAgainstWaron People
and he have stated that comrades have financial
problemandappealtocontributefortheforum.

22] Invideocliphavingpath Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

LAAL/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1 armed naxals in
uniformareseenwalkinginjungleandbackground
sound of CPI (Maoist) Party spokesperson Aazad
playedandstatesthatMaoismteachesusthatself
preservationispossibleonlythroughwar.

23] Invideocliphavingpath Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

LAAL/ VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2 armed naxals in
uniformareseencomingforgatheringforfunction
in jungle and greeting each other also many red
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
453 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

bannersareseenandononebanneritisseenthe
name comrade Janki (Anuradha Gandhi) Amar
Rahe and further the gathered armed naxals and
other peoples shouted the slogans as Bharat ki
CommunistPartyMaowadiZindabad,BharatkiNav
JanwadiKrantiZindabadand encounterbyarmed
naxalsinwhichpolicepersonswerekilledisseen.

24] Invideocliphavingpath Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

LAAL/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3 armed naxals in
uniformareseentakingtrainingandexercisingin
jungleandbackgroundsoundofCPI(Maoist)party
spokespersonAazadplayedandhestatesaboutthe
CPI (Maoist)armedstrengthandtheirtacticsand
showstheinterviewsofonenaxalabouttheKudru
ambushandCPI(Maoist)promotionalvideoisseen
howtheambushonpolicepartyisexecuted.

25] In the videoclip having path Exh.16/(1)

NAXILISTES/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1 armed naxals
inuniformareseenwalkinginjungleandcamping,
attending public meeting showing naxal tactics in
jungle.

26] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkal programme
_2010/Kutul_Maad/kutulbhoomkal_2010armed
naxalsinuniformalongwiththevillagersareseen
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
454 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

gatheredinjungletocelebratethe10thanniversary
ofBhoomkalandtheyareshoutingwiththeslogans
as Lal Salam, Mahan Bhoomkal Zindabad, Mahan
Bhoomkal Shahidonko Lal Salam and one armed
naxalinuniformseenaddressingtothegatheringof
around2000to3000peoplesandarmednaxals.

27] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_
2010/Vayanar_ EBT/ 1/ DSCN 4236, armed
naxalsinuniformalongwiththevillagersareseen
gatheredinjungleareshoutingwiththeslogansas
Jantana sarkar ko majbut karo,Dandkaranyako
aadhar elakeme badal dalo,Bharat ki communist
partymaowadizindabad.

28] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_
2010/Vayanar _EBT /2/ Bhoomakal_ 2010,
armednaxalsinuniformalongwiththevillagersare
seenmarchinginjunglewithredcolouredbanners
and flags and some green coloured dressed girls
seendancingandsingingonthestageandthousand
villagersgatheringalongwitharmednaxalsandone
naxal speaks and many red coloured banners and
pictures, naxal martyr monument is seen around
thereandarmednaxalsaredancingandonenaxal
takesvideoshootingofthedance.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
455 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

29] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Com. Kumli martyrdym
/DKVFOnCom.Kumlifunerals/Kumlifunerals
onenaxalladyinuniformnamedKumliisseendead
and other CPI (Maoist) naxal along with villagers
performedherfuneral.

30] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DK MATTERS/FILM/1, some armed
naxalsinuniformareseenwalkinginjungles.

31] Inaudiofolderhavingpath Exh.3/Ritu/from
old comp 23 oct 2012/songs/DK CNM,
Jharkhand abhen album_2010, Jung Ki Pukar,
Kranti.gana, somesongs,songs, and hundredsof
revolutionarynaxalsongsarethere.

32] InfolderatpathExh.3/films,itisseenthatin
thisfolder100sofEnglishandregionalmoviesand
videosareseen.

33] In videoclip having path Exh.3/RDF

Conference video/9DVD/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3,
accusedno.6SaibabaseenonRDF'sfirstconference
stageandrequestingRajkishoretodeclarethenew
panelofRDFandRajkishoredeclaresthenewpanel
andcalleduponallthemembersondaisandthese
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
456 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

members were fifteen in numbers standing and

holding and raising their hands towards the
audience alongwith accused no.6 Saibaba, one of
thepanelmember.

34] In videoclip having path Exh.3/RDF

Conference video/9DVD/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_4,
comrade Rajkishore is seen declaring new office
bearersoftheRDFandfurthercomradeVaravararao
declaresasaPresident,comradeGhantiprasadamas
a Vice President and accused no.6 Saibaba is
declared as a Joint Secretary along with comrade
JeetanMarandiwhowasinjail,alsodeclaresasa
JointSecretary,comradeAjayasaTreasurer.

Videoclipsinelectronicgadgetsseizedfromthehousesearchof
accused no.6 Saibaba under seizure panchanama Exh.165 in
whichaccusedno.3HemMishrawasseen.

(1) In videoclip having path Exh.7/Exh.71/

(1)DVD/ 091204/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1 accused
no.3 Hem Mishra is seen in the audience of the
meetingforConventionagainstWaronPeopleheld
atSpeaker'shallConstitutionClubRafiMarg,New
Delhion4thDecember2009byForumAgainstWar
onPeopleandSaibabaissatonthedais.

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
457 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(2) In videoclip having path DVD at Exh.111,2

accusedNo.3HemMishraisseentakingactivepart
andsingingsongtocondemnthedeathofKishanji
(CPIMAOISTLeader)andgivingslogansLalSalam.

(3) In videoclip having path Ex7/Ex71/

(10DVD_09204/ VIDEO_TS accused No.3 Hem
Mishraisseentakingactivepartandsingingsongto
condemnthedeathofKishanji(NaxalLeader)and
givingslogansLalSalam.

(4) In videoclip having path Exh.3/Meetings/

Jiten Convention Against Death Penalty/20 Dec
2011 Jiten Convention 2 Compressed version/
convention disc 2/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3, accused
No.3HemMishraisseenalongwithagroupof10to
12 young people and he is speaking from the
podiumregardingdeathsentenceto JitenMarandi
andthesongwhichwassungbyJitanMarandiand
thereafteraccusedNo.3HemMishraalongwiththe
grouphavepresentedthesaidsong.

(5)InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/Meetings/Jiten
Convention Against Death Penalty/20 Dec 2011
JitenConvention2Compressedversion/convention
disc 2/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_4, accused No.3 Hem
Mishraalongwith10to12youngpersonsareseen
presenting song on Jharkhand and thereafter he
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
458 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

madeannouncementregardingpresentingasongin
Punjabi.

(6)InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/Meetings/Jiten
Convention Against Death Penalty/20 Dec 2011
JitenConvention2Compressedversion/convention
disc2/VTS_01_5,apersonisaddressingagathering
and accused No.3 Hem Mishra is seen taking
photographs,theeventisunderbannerConvention
and Cultural Performance 20 December 2011 at
India International Centre, New Delhi and in this
programme accused No.6 G.N. Saibaba was also
present.

(7) In videoclip having path Exh.7/Exh.71/

(1)DVD/091204/ VIDEO_TS/VTS _01_1 accused
No.3 Hem Mishra is seen in the audiance of the
meetingforConventionagainstWaronPeopleheld
atSpeaker'shallConstitutionClubRafiMarg,New
Delhion4thDecember2009byForumAgainstWar
on People and accused No.6 Saibaba was found
sittingonthedais.

Videoclipsinelectronicgadgetsseizedfromthehousesearchof
accused no.6 Saibaba under seizure panchanama Exh.165 in
whichaccusedno.4PrashantRahiwasseen.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
459 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(1) In videoclip having path Exh.3/films/

s1/RDF/2/VIDEO _TS/VTS_01_1, accused no.6
Saibabaisseenondaisandaccusedno.4Prashant
Rahiisfoundsittingintheaudiencewhereonelady
is giving slogans demanding return of Army from
KashmirandforliberationofKashmirandaccused
no.4 Prashant Rahi is seen responding to the
slogans.
(2)InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/RDFconference
videos/DVD_ VIDEO_TS, accused no. 4 Prashant
Rahi is seen attending and participating in the
convention of the first RDF conference held at
Hyderabadintheyear2012andfurtheritisseen
that accused no.6 Saibaba was addressing the
peoplefromthestageandthereisabighallhaving
largeaudienceandsittingcapacityisaround500is
seeninthevideoandaccusedNo.4PrashantRahiis
seensittinginthehallontherightsiderowhaving
capacity around 500 people and accused no.6
Saibabaisseenaddressingthemeeting.

(3) InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/1/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2, the dignitaries from
different parts including Shri G.N. Saibaba, Dy.
Secretary, RDF and accused No.4 Prashant Rahi
werecalledondaisascomradePrashantRahiand
thereafterhewasseenbelowthebannerofRDFon
thedaisalongwithothers.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
460 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(4)InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/Jeetan
1/video_TS/VTS_01_1,accusedNo.4PrashantRahi
is seen on the Dias alongwith 4persons in which
one lady by name Aparna, wife of Jeetan is seen
addressing,belowthebannerofJanConventionand
shehasstatedthatJeetanwasmakingdocumentary
attherelevanttime.

EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF CDR OF MOBILE SIM OF ACCUSED

NO.3HEMMISHRAandACCUSEDNO.4PRASHANTRAHI

545] ToprovecallrecordsofSIMcardsofaccusedno.3Hem
andno.4Prashant,prosecutionhasreliedontheevidenceof:

i]InvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche(P.W.11),and
ii]NodalOfficerRaviKhemrajPardeshi(P.W.16).

Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche (P.W.11) in his

examinationatExh.235statedthatduringinterrogationwithaccused
no.3 Hem Mishra it was revealed that he was using mobile SIM
bearing no. 9873877513 and hewasin contactwithaccusedno.6
Saibabaandaccusedno.6SaibabausingmobileSIMno.8800100490
andfurtheraccusedno.2PanduNaroteandno.1MaheshTirkiwere
using mobile SIM no.9970061273, 9404834308, 9404463877 and
8860282590. HestatedthatheissuedlettertoSuperintendentof
Police,GadchiroliatExh.237on25.08.2013andreceivedCDRdetails
oftheabovemobileSIMnumberson31.08.2013andon31.08.2013
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
461 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

heopenedCDRreportreceivedbyhimandaftergoingthroughithe
foundlocationofmobileSIMbearingno.8800100490belongingto
accused no.6 Saibabaandmobile SIMbearingnos.9873877513&
8860601278 of accused no.3 Hem Mishra. He stated that on
09.01.2014 and 16.01.2014 he made correspondence to different
mobilecompaniesbyletterExh.262forgettingCDRofmobile SIM
nos. 9873877513, 8860601278,8800100490,8394875017andthe
saidletterwassentthroughSuperintendentofPolice,Gadchiroli.
546] He was crossexaminedbythe learned defence counsel.
Incrossexamination,headmittedthatSIMcardsofmobilehandsets
seizedfromaccusedno.2PanduNaroteandno.1MaheshTirkiwere
sentforgettingtheCDRdetailsandgotthesamebutthesearenot
filedonrecord. Hedeniedthatthetowerlocationofaccusedno.2
PanduNaroteandno.1MaheshTirkiwasatGadchirolidistricthead
quarter and therefore he had not filed said details. However, no
questions were put in respect of CDR of mobile SIM numbers of
accusedno.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahiandno.6Saibaba.

547] P.W.No.16 Ravi Khemraj Pardeshi is a Nodal Officer of

Vodafonemobilecompany.Thiswitnessinhisexaminationinchiefat
Exh.329statedthatsince2007hehasbeenservingasaNodalOfficer
inVodafonecompany.HeknowsFransisPareraandhewasworking
asAlternateNodalOfficerandinthiscase,CalldetailsrecordofCell
no. 9873877513, 8860601278 and 8394875017 were produced by
their company. Out of those numbers, the numbers 9873877513,
8860601278wereofDelhiandthirdnumber8394875017wasfrom
UP(West). ThenumbersofDelhiwasinthenameofaccusedno.3
Hem Mishra and third number 8394875017 was in the name of
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
462 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accusedno.4PrashantRahi.HeidentifiedCDRofmobileSIMnos.
873877513,8860601278and8394875017. Thiswitnessidentified
the signature of Fransis Parera and seal of the company on CDR
detailsatExh.330,331and332.Exh.330isCDRofmobileSIMno.
9873877513. Exh.331 is CDR of mobile SIM 8860601278 and
Exh.332 is CDR of mobile SIM 8394875017. He stated that the
extractsofExh.330,331and332weretakenfromserverandtothat
effect certificate undersection 65B ofEvidenceAct wasissuedby
FransisParera,AlternateNodalOfficer.

548] He identified his signature and seal of the company

thereonandstatedthat the contentsofExh.330,331and332are
correct. He stated that thecontentsofExh.330,331and332are
automaticallygeneratedandatthetimeofsupplyingSIMcardthey
have obtained customer application form and Photo ID proof of
concernedpersonswhichheproducedwithhiscoveringletterdated
642016. He stated that the copyof customerapplication formin
respectofmobileno.8394875017ofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiisat
Exh.335,applicationforminrespectofmobileSIMno.9873877513
ofaccusedno.3HemMishraisatExh.336andapplicationformin
respectofmobileSIMno.8860601278isofaccusedno.3HemMishra
is at Exh.337 and the CDR Exh.330, 331 and 332 and certificates
underSec.65BofEvidenceActweresubmittedalongwithletterdated
1522014atExh.338.

549] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel. He admitted that his company has been asked to supply
copies of CDR and SDR by the letter dated 2322014 issued by
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
463 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

SuperintendentofPolice,Gadchiroli.Headmittedthathecannotsay
whetherSDRhavebeensuppliedalongwiththeCDRandhedidnot
makeanyenquirywhetherCDRandSDRarerequiredinthepresent
case.HeadmittedthatinthecertificateExh.333thenameofthe
holderofmobilenumbersisnotmentionedandhecannotassignany
reason for the same. He denied that they have not purposefully
suppliedSDR.

550] The prosecution has further examined one Engineer of

B.S.N.L.ShriRajneeshkumarRatiram(P.W.20)atExh.359,whoinhis
examination has stated that since 2012 he is serving as Sub
Divisional Engineer in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Deharadoon
and Superintendent of Police, Gadchiroli had asked him for CDR
detailsofMobileSimno.9411367099andhehadsuppliedtheCDR
detailsofthesaidMobileSimfrom1 st August2013to592013at
Exh.360.HestatedthathepreparedcertificateunderSec.65Bofthe
Evidence Act, 1872 in respect of CDR details of mobile Sim of
9411367099. According to him, print out of CDR details hasbeen
produced by fetching details from the server which is located at
Chandigarhand the dataofthisMobileSimwasstoredinserver
automaticallyandhehadtakenprintoutofCDRdetailsatExh.360
andissuedcertificateu/s65BofEvidenceAct.Hefurtherstatedthat
he forwarded the certificate and CDR details to Superintendent of
Police,Gadchirolibyletterdated2222014videExh.362.

551] Inhiscrossexaminationbythelearneddefencecounsel,
he denied that he is deposing falsely that he had taken the CDR
detailsofMobileSimno.9411367099,hehasnotpreparedcertificate
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
464 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

asperSection65BofEvidenceActandhedidnotforwardcertificate
andCDRdetailstoS.P.Gadchiroli.Theprosecutionhasnotproduced
anyevidenceonrecordtoshowwhowastheownerofmobileSIM
bearingno.9411367099,henceevidenceofthiswitnessisnotmuch
helpfultoprosecution.

EVIDENCEINRESPECTOFCDROFMOBILESIMOFACCUSED
NO.6SAIBABA.

552] TheCDRofmobile SIM no.8800100490ofaccusedno.6

SaibabahasbeenadmittedbydefenceatExh.412,however,toprove
the call records of mobile SIM of accused no.6 Saibaba the
prosecutionhasreliedontheevidenceoffollowingwitnesses:

i]InvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche(P.W.11)atExh.235,
ii]SDPORameshDhumal(P.W.23)atExh.414and
iii]NodalOfficerManojPatil(P.W.22)

553] Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche (P.W.11) in his

examinationinchief at Exh.235statedthatduringhouse searchof
accused no.6 Saibaba, some mobile numbers were revealed and
therefore, he had issued letter to the office of S.P. Gadchiroli for
obtainingtheCDRofthosenumbers. Hestatedthatthreemobiles
whichwereseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.6Saibabawere
openedinpresenceofpanchasandthedatacontainedinthemobile
phone i.e. dial calls, received calls were noted and panchanama
(Exh.203)tothateffectwaspreparedon1892013inthepresenceof
panchas. He stated that he recorded statement of accused no.6
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
465 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Saibaba on 912014 and on 1612014 and made correspondence

withthedifferentmobilecompanies.Hestatedthathegotcertified
copyofCDRalongwithcertificateinsealedcondition.Hestatedthat
hehadreceivedCDRfrommobilecompaniesfromSuperintendentof
Police office on email and taken out the printouts of the same.
ThereisnocrossexaminationonbehalfofdefenceinrespectofCDR
ofmobileSIMnumberofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

554] RameshDhumal(P.W.23)theInvestigatingOfficerinS.C.
No.130/2015inhisexaminationinchiefatExh.414hasstatedthat
hehadissuedlettertomobilecompaniesi.e.Airtel,Vodafone,BSNL
for getting certified copies of CDR, SDR and CAF through
SuperintendentofPolice,Gadchiroliandaftergettingthesame,those
arefiledonrecord.Duringcrossexaminationhedeniedthathedid
notissuelettertoMobilecompaniesi.e.Airtel,Vodafone,BSNLfor
getting certified copies of CDR, SDR, CAF and certificate under
Sec.65(b) of Evidence Act through Superintendent of Police,
Gadchiroli.

555] P.W.22 Manoj Patil, Circle Nodal Officer, Indian Airtail

office,inhisexaminationatExh.411,statedthattheircompanyhad
receivedaletterfromSuperintendentofPolice,Gadchirolidated28
22014 asking details of CDR in respect of mobile Cell
no.8800100490 and the said letter was received by his colleague
StephenMenageswhoexpiredlastyearandunderhissignaturethe
CDRdetailsofmobilenumberalongwith399pagesweresupplied.
HeidentifiedthesignatureofStephen,onthatletteratExh.412and
statedthatonallCDRthereisastampofIndianAirtelandpracticeof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
466 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

taking CDR details is that the Nodal Officer is having unique

passwordnumberfromwhichhesearches. Hestatedthatthereis
serveroftheircompanyatDelhiandthedatainthepresentcaseis
directly taken out from the Delhiserverandeverynodalofficeris
havingaccesstotheserversituatedatdifferentplacelikeDelhiwith
uniquepasswordbywhichhecanaccessthe mainserverandfrom
usingthatpasswordhecanaccesstothemainserversituatedatDelhi
and take out the CDR of particular mobile number along with its
tower location. He stated that in CDR details the information
regardingthecell numberfromwhichcallismadealongwiththe
IMEI,numberstartingofcallendingofthesame,towerlocationcode,
themobilenumberthroughwhichthecallismadeandtheplacefrom
where call was received are mentioned. The tower location is
mentionedinthecolumnofCellIDandCDRdetailsareatExh.413.

556] HestatedthatCustomerApplicationFormatExh.418isin
thenameofaccusedno.6Saibabaandphotocopyoftelephonebill
(Exh.419) is also in the name of accused no.6 G.N. Saibaba. He
identifiedDelhiUniversityIdentityCard(Exh.420)ofaccusedno.6
Saibaba. He stated that from the CDR of above phone number it
revealsthatfromtimetotimetheaccusedno.3HemMishra,no.4
Prashant Rahi and no.6 Saibaba were in contact with each other.
Learneddefencecounselsforaccusednos.1to6declinedtocross
examinethiswitness.

557] As the defence has not disputed the evidence of P.W.22

Manoj Patil and admitted the CDR of mobile SIM bearing no.
8800100490 belongs to accused no.6 Saibaba and through the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
467 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

evidenceofP.W.16KhemrajPardesitheprosecutionhasprovedthat
accused no.3 Hem Mishra filed two customer application forms
separately for issuing mobile SIM card from Vodafone mobile
company and the copies of the applications are produced by this
witness.Thesecopiesbearsphotographsofaccusedno.3HemMishra
and his signatures thereon. These applications are at Exh.336 and
337. Evidencefurthershowsthataccusedno.4PrashantRahihad
appliedvidecustomerapplicationformatExh.335forgrantofmobile
SIMcard,andthatVodafonemobilecompanyissuedthemobileSIM
cardno.8394875017toaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.Thecustomer
applicationformExh.335bearshisphotographandsignature.There
isnocrossexaminationbydefenceadvocateonthepointthataccused
no.3 Hem Mishra and no.4 Prashant Rahi did not file customer
application forms (Exhs. 335, 336 and 337) and mobile SIM card
bearing nos. 9873877513 and 8860601278 were not issued to
accusedno.3HemMishraandmobileSIMcardno.8394875017was
not issued to accused no.4 Prashant Rahi. Hence, in view of the
above admitted position it is necessary to see the last call details
recordofmobileSIMcardsbelongingtoaccusedno.3HemMishra,
accusedno.4PrashantRahiandaccusedno.6Saibaba.

558] Fromcalldetails(Exh.330)ofaccusedno.3HemMishrait
revealsthataccusedno.6Saibabamadephonecallsfromhismobile
no. 8800100490 to accused no.3 Hem Mishra on his mobile nos.
9873877513&8860601278.Thecalldetailsareasunder:

Sr. MobileNumberof MobileNumber Date Calltime Duration

No. accusedno.6 ofaccusedno.3
Saibaba Hem
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
468 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1 8800100490 9873877513 12122012 18:52:28 0

2 8800100490 9873877513 12122012 18:52:29 0
3 8800100490 9873877513 472013 21:10:32 0

4 8800100490 9873877513 472013 21:10:33 0

5 8800100490 9873877513 472013 21:10:34 0
3 8800100490 9873877513 572013 9:40:44 0
4 8800100490 9873877513 572013 9:40:46 0
5 8800100490 8860601278 872013 23:53:30 0
6 8800100490 8860601278 872013 23:53:43 0
7 8800100490 8860601278 972013 1:04:07 0
8 8800100490 8860601278 3172013 12:41:20 0
9 8800100490 8860601278 3172013 12:42:15 0
10 8800100490 8860601278 3172013 12:43:54 0
11 8800100490 9873877513 332013 14:05:44 1
12 8800100490 9873877513 332013 14:05:51 1
13 8800100490 9873877513 332013 14:05:56 1
14 8800100490 9873877513 332013 14:06:05 1
15 8800100490 9873877513 842013 20:10:37 1
16 8800100490 9873877513 842013 20:10:42 1
17 8800100490 9873877513 842013 20:10:46 1
18 8800100490 9873877513 842013 20:10:51 1
19 8800100490 9873877513 472013 21:10:37 1
20 8800100490 9873877513 472013 21:10:42 1
21 8800100490 9873877513 472013 21:10:47 1
22 8800100490 9873877513 572013 09:43:21 1
23 8800100490 9873877513 572013 09:43:27 1

559] From call details (Exh.413) of accused no.6 Saibaba it

revealsthataccusedno.6Saibabamadephonecallsfromhismobile
no. 8800100490 to accused no.4 Prashant Rahi on his mobile no.
8394875017Thecalldetailsareasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
469 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Sr. MobileNumberof MobileNo.of Date Calltime Duration

No. accusedno.6 accusedno.4
Saibaba Prashant
1 8800100490 8394875017 692012 0:08:41 0
2 8800100490 8394875017 692012 0:08:43 0
3 8800100490 8394875017 1952013 0:32:18 0
4 8800100490 8394875017 1952013 0:32:19 0
5 8800100490 8394875017 1952013 10:56:08 0
6 8800100490 8394875017 1952013 10:56:10 0
7 8800100490 8394875017 2152013 12:03:19 0
8 8800100490 8394875017 362013 19:50:06 0
9 8800100490 8394875017 362013 19:50:07 0
10 8800100490 8394875017 362013 19:50:08 0
11 8800100490 8394875017 362013 19:50:10 0
12 8800100490 8394875017 362013 19:50:11 0
13 8800100490 8394875017 462013 19:53:42 0
14 8800100490 8394875017 462013 19:53:44 0
15 8800100490 8394875017 462013 19:53:46 0
16 8800100490 8394875017 472013 21:33:48 0
17 8800100490 8394875017 472013 21:34:29 0
18 8800100490 8394875017 472013 21:39:54 0
19 8800100490 8394875017 472013 21:39:55 0
20 8800100490 8394875017 472013 21:39:56 0
21 8800100490 8394875017 472013 21:39:56 0
22 8800100490 8394875017 472013 21:43:30 0
23 8800100490 8394875017 472013 21:43:31 0
24 8800100490 8394875017 472013 21:43:31 0
25 8800100490 8394875017 472013 21:43:32 0
26 8800100490 8394875017 572013 14:44:34 125
27 8800100490 8394875017 872013 17:58:17 0
28 8800100490 8394875017 872013 17:58:21 0
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
470 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

29 8800100490 8394875017 872013 17:58:24 0

30 8800100490 8394875017 872013 17:58:26 0
31 8800100490 8394875017 972013 19:27:18 0
32 8800100490 8394875017 972013 19:27:20 0
33 8800100490 8394875017 972013 19:27:21 0
34 8800100490 8394875017 3072013 19:34:51 0
35 8800100490 8394875017 3072013 19:34:51 0
36 8800100490 8394875017 3072013 19:34:52 0
37 8800100490 8394875017 3172013 17:48:13 0
38 8800100490 8394875017 3172013 17:48:15 0
39 8800100490 8394875017 3172013 17:48:16 0
40 8800100490 8394875017 3172013 17:52:37 0
41 8800100490 8394875017 3172013 17:52:38 0
42 8800100490 8394875017 3172013 17:52:39 0
43 8800100490 8394875017 1482013 10:21:46 0
44 8800100490 8394875017 1482013 13:34:08 99

560] From call details (Exh.413) of accused no.6 Saibaba it

reveals that accused no.3 Hem Mishra made phone calls from his
mobilenos.9873877513&8860601278toaccusedno.6Saibabaon
hismobileno.8800100490.Thecalldetailsareasunder:

Sr. MobileNumberof MobileNo.of Date Calltime Duration

No. accusedno.3Hem accusedno.6
Saibabai
1 9873877513 8800100490 1592012 22:23:56 0
2 8860601278 8800100490 872013 16:18:01 0
3 8860601278 8800100490 872013 16:27:56 94
4 8860601278 8800100490 872013 23:31:18 0
5 8860601278 8800100490 872013 23:52:41 0
6 8860601278 8800100490 872013 23:52:43 0
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
471 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

7 8860601278 8800100490 872013 23:53:02 0

8 8860601278 8800100490 1072013 10:32:32 37
9 8860601278 8800100490 1072013 10:37:48 26
10 8860601278 8800100490 3172013 11:50:03 26
11 8860601278 8800100490 3172013 13:49:30 0
12 8860601278 8800100490 3172013 14:00:23 0
13 8860601278 8800100490 3172013 14:00:42 0
14 8860601278 8800100490 282013 18:41:50 0
15 8860601278 8800100490 282013 18:46:53 0

561] From call details (Exh.413) of accused no.6 Saibaba it

revealsthataccusedno.4PrashantRahimadephonecallsfromhis
mobileno.8394875017toaccusedno.6Saibabaonhismobileno.
8800100490.Thecalldetailsareasunder:

Sr. MobileNumberof MobileNo.of Date Calltime Duration

No. accusedno.4 accusedno.6
Prashant Saibabai
1 8394875017 8800100490 792012 07:39:29 0
2 8394875017 8800100490 1392012 10:56:32 0
3 8394875017 8800100490 1392012 10:56:32 0
4 8394875017 8800100490 472013 21:29:10 0
5 8394875017 8800100490 472013 21:31:32 0
6 8394875017 8800100490 472013 21:31:36 0
7 8394875017 8800100490 472013 21:31:39 0
8 8394875017 8800100490 472013 21:31:42 0
9 8394875017 8800100490 472013 21:36:08 0
10 8394875017 8800100490 472013 21:37:59 0
11 8394875017 8800100490 572013 12:41:23 0
12 8394875017 8800100490 572013 12:46:25 0
13 8394875017 8800100490 572013 13:08:41 8
14 8394875017 8800100490 1272013 07:12:20 o
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
472 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

15 8394875017 8800100490 1272013 07:17:07 0

16 8394875017 8800100490 1482013 10:25:11 0

ArgumentonCDRbySpl.P.P.

562] LearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathianathansubmittedthattheCDR
of mobile SIM card of accused no.3 Hem Mishra bearing nos.
9873877513 and 8860601278 and accused no.4 Prashant Rahi
bearingno.8394875017wereprovedthroughtheevidenceofNodal
OfficerRaviKhemrajPardeshi(P.W.16),whoinhisexaminationstated
that the CDR Exh.330, 331 and 332 were issued by his company
under the signature of Fransis Parera, Alternate Nodal Officer and
from the CDR report (Exh.413) it reveals that the last location of
mobileSIMofaccusedno.3HemMishraon18thAugust2013was
withinDelhiUniversity.TheCDRofmobileofaccusedno.6Saibaba
bearing no. 8800100490and CDRreport isadmittedbydefence at
Exh.413 and the crossexamination of P.W.No.22 Manoj Patil was
declinedbythedefenceandfromCDRReportofaccusedno.3Hem
Mishra at Exh.330 it is clear that on 12.12.2012, 05.07.2013,
08.07.2013, 08.07.2013, 09.07.2013, 31.07.2013, 03.03.2313,
08.04.2013,04.07.2013and05.07.2013accusedno.6Saibabamade
phonecallfromhismobileSIMno.8800100490tomobileSIMno.
9873877513&8860601278ofaccusedno.3HemMishra.FromCDR
report of accused no.6 Saibaba at Exh.413 it is clear that on
06.09.2012, 19.05.2013, 21.05.2013, 03.06.2013, 04.06.2013,
04.07.2013, 05.07.2013, 08.07.2013, 09.07.2013, 30.07.2013,
31.07.2013and14.08.2013accusedno.6Saibabamadephonecall
from his mobile SIM Card no. 8800100490 to mobile SIM no.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
473 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

8394875017 of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi. Further, from CDR

reportofaccusedno.6SaibabaatExh.413itisclearthataccusedno.3
HemMishramadephonecallstoaccusedno.6Saibabaonhismobile
SIM Card no. 8800100490 on 15.9.2012, 8.7.2013, 10.7.2013,
31.7.2013and2.8.2013,andaccusedno.4PrashantRahimadephone
calls to accused no.6 Saibaba on his mobile SIM Card no.
8800100490on13.9.2012,4.7.2013,5.7.2013and14.8.2013.

563] He submitted that on perusal of CDR details (Exhs.330

and413),itisclearthattheaccusedno.3HemMishra,accusedno.4
PrashantRahiandaccusedno.6Saibabamadephonecallstoeach
otheronseveraldatesandwereincontactwitheachotherandthisis
important in view of denial by accused no.3 Hem Mishra, no.4
PrashantRahiandno.6Saibabaintheirstatementundersection313
ofCr.P.C.thattheyhadanyconnectionwitheachother.

564] HesubmittedthatthroughtheevidenceofNodalOfficer
P.W.16 Ravi Pardeshi the prosecution has proved the customer
applicationforms(Exh.336and337)submittedbyaccusedno.3Hem
MishraforissuanceofmobileSIMcardswithhisphotographasphoto
IDandonthatbasisaccusedno.3HemMishrawasissuedmobileSIM
cardbearingnos.9873877513and8860601278andonthebasisof
customerapplicationformatExh.335,mobileSIMcardbearingno.
8394875017wasissuedtoaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.Hesubmitted
thattheevidenceofthiswitnessonthepointofissuingmobileSIM
cardnos.9873877513and8860601278toaccusedno.3HemMishra
and mobile SIM card bearing no. 8394875017 to accused no.4
Prashant Rahi and submission of customer application forms
alongwithphotographasphotoIDproofbyaccusedno.3HemMishra
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
474 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

andno.4PrashantRahiisnotchallengedbythedefenceandassuch
the prosecution hasprovedthefact thatthe mobile SIMcardnos.
9873877513and8860601278werebelongingtoaccusedno.3Hem
MishraandmobileSIMcardbearingno.8394875017wasbelonging
toaccusedno.4PrashantRahiandfromCDRReports(Exhs.330and
413)itisprovedthattheywereincontactwitheachother.

SubmissionofAdv.Gadlingforaccused

565] The learned Advocate Shri Gadling for the accused

submitted that the CDR of mobile SIM card nos. 8394875017,
9873877513and8860601278cannotbesaidtobeprovedthrough
the evidence of P.W.16 Ravi Pardeshi as Fransis Parera, Alternate
NodalOfficerwhosignedCDRExh.330hasnotbeenexamined.

Conclusion

566] Atthisjuncture,itisnecessarytoconsidertheratiolaid
downbytheHon'bleSupremeCourtintheJudgmentofAnvarP.V.
vs.P.KBasheer&Ors.,reportedin2014(6)ALLMR951(SC)and
for proper appreciation, I propose to reproduce the relevant
paragraphsno.19to24ofthesaidjudgment,asunder:

19. ''Proof of electronic record is a special

provisionintroducedbytheITActamendingvarious
provisionsundertheEvidenceAct.Theverycaption
of Section 65A of the Evidence Act, read with
Sections 59 and 65B is sufficient tohold that the
specialprovisionsonevidencerelatingtoelectronic
record shall be governed by the procedure
prescribedunderSection65BoftheEvidenceAct.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
475 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Thatisacompletecodeinitself.Beingaspeciallaw,
the general law under Sections 63 and 65 has to
yield.

20. InState(NCTofDelhi)NavjotSandhualias
Afsan Guru[1], a two Judge Bench of this Court
hadanoccasiontoconsideranissueonproduction
ofelectronicrecordasevidence.Whileconsidering
the printouts of the computerized records of the
calls pertaining to the cellphones, it was held at
Paragraph150asfollows:

150. According to Section 63, secondary evidence

means and includes, among other things, copies
made from the original by mechanical processes
whichinthemselvesinsuretheaccuracyofthecopy,
andcopiescomparedwithsuchcopies.Section65
enables secondary evidence of the contents of a
documenttobeadducediftheoriginalisofsucha
nature as not to be easily movable. It is not in
dispute that the information contained in the call
recordsisstoredin hugeserverswhichcannot be
easily moved and produced in the court. That is
whattheHighCourthasalsoobservedatpara276.
Hence,printoutstakenfromthecomputers/servers
bymechanicalprocessandcertifiedbyaresponsible
officialoftheserviceprovidingcompanycanbeled
inevidencethroughawitnesswhocanidentifythe
signatures of the certifying officer or otherwise
speakofthefactsbasedonhispersonalknowledge.
Irrespectiveofthecompliancewiththerequirements
of Section 65B, which is a provision dealing with
admissibilityofelectronicrecords,thereisnobarto
adducing secondary evidence under the other
provisionsoftheEvidenceAct,namely,Sections63
and65.Itmaybethatthecertificatecontainingthe
detailsinsubSection(4)ofSection65Bisnotfiled
in the instant case, but that does not mean that
secondaryevidencecannotbegivenevenifthelaw
permits such evidence to be given in the
circumstancesmentionedintherelevantprovisions,
namely,Sections63and65.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
476 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

21. It may be seen that it was a case where a

responsibleofficialhaddulycertifiedthedocument
atthetimeofproductionitself.Thesignaturesinthe
certificatewerealsoidentified.Thatisapparentlyin
compliance with the procedure prescribed under
Section 65B of the Evidence Act. However, it was
held that irrespective of the compliance with the
requirements of Section 65B, which is a special
provisiondealingwithadmissibilityoftheelectronic
record, there is no bar in adducing secondary
evidence,underSections63and65,ofanelectronic
record.

22. Theevidencerelatingtoelectronicrecord,as
notedhereinbefore,beingaspecialprovision,the
generallawonsecondaryevidenceunderSection63
readwithSection65oftheEvidenceActshallyield
to the same. Generalia specialibus non derogant,
speciallawwillalwaysprevailoverthegenerallaw.
Itappears,thecourtomittedtotakenoteofSections
59 and 65A dealing with the admissibility of
electronic record. Sections 63 and 65 have no
applicationinthecaseofsecondaryevidencebyway
ofelectronicrecord;thesameiswhollygovernedby
Sections65Aand65B.Tothatextent,thestatement
of law on admissibility of secondary evidence
pertaining to electronic record, as stated by this
courtinNavjotSandhucase(supra),doesnotlay
down the correct legal position. It requires to be
overruledandwedoso.Anelectronicrecordbyway
of secondary evidence shall not be admitted in
evidenceunlesstherequirementsunderSection65B
are satisfied. Thus, in the case of CD, VCD, chip,
etc., the same shall be accompanied by the
certificateintermsofSection65Bobtainedatthe
time of taking the document, without which, the
secondary evidence pertaining to that electronic
record,isinadmissible.

23. The appellant admittedly has not produced

anycertificateintermsofSection65Binrespectof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
477 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

theCDs,ExhibitsP4,P8,P9,P10,P12,P13,P15,P20
andP22.Therefore,thesamecannotbeadmittedin
evidence.Thus,thewholecasesetupregardingthe
corrupt practice using songs, announcements and
speechesfalltotheground.

24. Thesituationwouldhavebeendifferenthad
theappellantadducedprimaryevidence,bymaking
available in evidence, the CDs used for
announcementandsongs.HadthoseCDsusedfor
objectionable songs or announcements been duly
got seized through the police or Election
Commissionandhadthesamebeenusedasprimary
evidence, the High Court could have played the
sameincourttoseewhethertheallegationswere
true. That is not the situation in this case. The
speeches,songsandannouncementswererecorded
usingotherinstrumentsandbyfeedingthemintoa
computer, CDs were made therefrom which were
producedincourt,withoutduecertification.Those
CDs cannot be admitted in evidence since the
mandatory requirements of Section 65B of the
Evidence Act are not satisfied. It is clarified that
notwithstandingwhatwehavestatedhereininthe
precedingparagraphsonthesecondaryevidenceon
electronicrecordwithreferencetoSection59,65A
and65BoftheEvidenceAct,ifanelectronicrecord
assuchisusedasprimaryevidenceunderSection
62 of the Evidence Act, the same isadmissible in
evidence, without compliance of the conditions in
Section 65B ofthe Evidence Act.''(emphasizedby
me)

567] On careful reading of the above dictum, the Hon'ble

Supreme Court has not disturbed the law laid down in State vs.
NavjyotSandhu@AfsanGuru(2005)11SCC600) totheextent
thatwherearesponsibleofficialhaddulycertifiedthedocumentat
thetimeofproductionitselfandhissignaturesareidentifiedinthe
court of law then it is in apparent compliance withthe procedure
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
478 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

prescribedunderSection65BoftheEvidenceAct.Theseobservations
areprecededbytheobservationsinNavjyotSandhu'scaseinwhich
thereisclearmentionthattherewasnocertificatefiledinthecase
underSection65BoftheIndianEvidenceAct.Itisevidentthatwhat
is overruled is the observations relating to the admissibility of
electronic evidence as secondary evidence irrespective of the
compliancewiththeprocedureprovidedunderSection65ofIndian
EvidenceActwhichisnotthesituationincaseathand.

568] In the present case the defence has not crossexamined

investigatingofficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheonthepointthathedidnot
issuelettertothedifferentmobilecompaniesforgettingCDRthrough
S.P.Gadchiroli.Furtherthedefencehasnotchallengedtheevidence
ofinvestigatingofficerP.W.11SuhasBawchethataccusedno.3Hem
MishradidnotapplyformobileSIMCardnumbersbyfilingcustomer
application Forms at Exh. 336 & 337 and he received mobile SIM
Card nos. 9873877513 and 8860601278. Further defence has not
challengedtheevidenceofinvestigatingofficerP.W.11SuhasBawche
thataccusedno.4PrashantdidnotapplyformobileSIMCardnumber
by filing customer application Form at Exh. 335 and he received
mobile SIMCard no. 8394875017whichbeartheirsignaturesand
photographsthereon.Hence,consideringtheunchallengedevidence
of investigating officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche on this point,
prosecution has proved that mobile SIM bearing nos. 9873877513
and 8860601278 were issued to accused no. 3 Hem Mishra and
mobile SIM bearing no.8394875017 was issued to accused no.4
PrashantRahi.TheHon'bleApexCourthasnotoverruledtheratio
laiddowninthecaseof Statevs.NavjyotSandhu@AfsanGuru
(2005) 11 SCC 600) to the extent that whether the responsible
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
479 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

officialhasdulycertifiedthedocumentatthetimeofproductionitself
and his signature is identified in the court of law and then
complianceofsection65BofEvidenceActismadeout.Hence,CDR
reportsatExh.330and331belongingtoaccusedno.3HemMishra
andCDRReportatExh.332belongingtoaccusedno.4PrashantRahi
canbereadinevidence.

569] Inviewofabove,thecallrecorddetailsofmobileSIMsof
HemMishraandPrashantRahifiledonrecordatExhs.330,331and
332canbereadinevidence.

570] EvenassumingforthesakeofargumentthattheCDRof
mobile SIM card nos. 9873877513 and 8860601278 belonging to
accused no.3 Hem Mishra and mobile SIM card no. 8394875017
belongingtoaccusedno.4PrashantRahihavenotbeenprovedbut
fromtheevidenceofNodalOfficerP.W.16RaviPardeshiitisproved
that accused no.3 Hem Mishra submitted the customer application
forms(Exh.336and337)forissuanceofmobileSIMcardswithhis
photographasphotoIDandonthatbasismobileSIMcardbearing
nos.9873877513and8860601278were issuedtohimandonthe
basisofcustomerapplicationformatExh.335alongwithphotograph
IDsubmittedbyaccusedno.4PrashantRahi,mobileSIMcardbearing
no.8394875017wasissuedtohim.Thereisnocrossexaminationby
thedefencetoP.W.16RaviPardesionthispoint.

571] Further,fromtheevidenceofNodelOfficerP.W.22Manoj
Patil, it reveals that accused no.6 Saibaba has given customer
applicationformatExh.418alongwithhisphotoIDatExh.420for
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
480 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

gettingmobileSIMcardandSIMcardbearingno.8800100490was
issued to accused no.6 Saibaba and CDR of SIM card no.
8800100490isatExh.413. Thedefencedeclinedtocrossexamine
P.W.22 Manoj and further admitted the CDR of mobile SIM card
bearingNo.8800100490ofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

572] From CDR, Exh.413 of accused no.6 Saibaba it is clear

that on 06.09.2012, 19.05.2013, 21.05.2013, 3.06.2013, 4.6.2013,
4.7.2013,5.7.2013,8.7.2013,9.7.2013,30.7.2013,31.7.2013andon
14.8.2013accusedno.6Saibabamadephonecallsfromhismobile
SIMno.8800100490toaccusedno.3HemMishraonhismobileSIM
no.9873877513&8860601278.

573] From CDR, Exh.413 it is clear that on 15.9.2012,

8.7.2013, 10.7.2013, 31.7.2013 and 2.8.2013 accused no.3 Hem
Mishra made phone calls from his mobile nos. 9873877513 &
8860601278toaccusedno.6Saibabaonhismobileno.8800100490.

574] From CDR, Exh.413 it is clear that on 13.9.2012,

4.7.2013, 5.7.2013, 14.8.2013 accused no.4 Prashant Rahi made
phonecallsfromhismobileno.8394875017toaccusedno.6Saibaba
onhismobileno.8800100490.

575] AccordingtothedefencetheallegedCDRofmobileSIM
cardnos.9873877513&8860601278 ofaccusedno.3HemMishra
and CDR of mobile SIM card no. 8394875017 of accused no.4
PrashantRahiandmobileSIMcardno.8800100490ofaccusedno.6
Saibaba can not be believed as prosecution has not produced the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
481 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

relevantIMEInumberofmobilehandsetofaccusedno.3HemMishra,
accusedno.4PrashantRahiandaccusedno.6Saibaba.Itiscommon
knowledgethatnowadaysevenilliteratepersonwouldnotusethe
samehandsetfordoingillegalactivities.Inthepresentcaseaccused
no.6SaibabaisaDoctorofPhilosophy,accusedno.4PrashantRahiis
aJournalistandaccusedno.3HemMishraisastudentofJawaharlal
Nehru University, Delhi and they are highly qualified persons and
thesepersonswouldnotusethesamehandsetsformakingthecallfor
illegalactivities. Hence,nonproductionofIMEInumbersofmobile
handsets from which the calls were made is not fatal to the
prosecutionandassuchitisnotthecaseoftheprosecutionthatany
handsetwasseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishra
andaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.

576] InviewofadmittedCDRofmobileSIMcardbearingno.
8800100490 belonging to accused no.6 Saibaba and unchallenged
evidenceofprosecutionthatSIMcardmobilenos.9873877513and
8860601278 were supplied to accused no.3 Hem Mishra having
customerapplicationformatExh.336and337andmobileSIMcard
mobileno.8394875017havingcustomerapplicationformatExh.335
wassuppliedtoaccusedno.4PrashantRahi,prosecutionestablished
thefactthataccusedno.3HemMishra,accusedno.4PrashantRahi
andaccusedno.6Saibabawereincontactwitheachotherontheir
mobilesandthelasttowerlocationofmobileSIMofaccusedno.3
HemMishra,accusedno.4PrashantRahiandaccusedno.6Saibaba
wasatDelhiUniversitycampuson18.8.2013andthisisanimportant
inviewofthedefenceoftheaccusedno.3HemMishra,no.4Prashant
Rahiandno.6Saibabadeniedintheirstatementsu/s313ofCr.P.C.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
482 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

that they were not knowing each other and they were never in
contactwitheachother.

ActivitiesoftheFACEBOOKAccountofaccusedno.3HemMishra

577] Accordingtotheprosecutionduringtheinterrogationwith
accused no.3 Hem Mishra by Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas
Bawache, it was revealed that the accused no.3 Hem Mishra was
havinghisfacebookaccountandheshowedhiswillingnesstoopen
hisfacebookaccount.Thereafter,InvestigatingOfficerP.W.11Suhas
BawchecalledpanchP.W.4ShrikantGaddewaratPoliceStation,Aheri
andoncomputerinstalledatPoliceStation,Aheri,theaccusedno.3
HemMishraopenedhisfacebookaccountinpresenceofpanchP.W.4
Shrikant Gaddewar and the activities of the facebook account of
accusedno.3HemMishrawereseenandInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11
SuhasBawchetookthescreenshotsandthereafterprintoutsofthe
screenshots of the activities of facebook account of accused no.3
Hem Mishra were taken in the Police Station in presence of P.W.4
Shrikant Gaddewar. To that effect panchanama at Exh.200 was
preparedandcopiesofscreenshotsofactivitiesoffacebookaccount
ofaccusedno.3HemMishra(Articlesno.A1toA16)wereannexed
withthesaidpanchanama.

EVIDENCE

578] To prove the above fact prosecution has relied on the

evidenceofthefollowingwitnesses:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
483 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1] PanchwitnessP.W.4ShrikantGaddewaratExh.198;and
2] InvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheatExh.235.

579] Panch witness P.W.4 Shrikant Gaddewar, in his

examinationatExh.198statedthaton26.8.2013hewascalledinthe
PoliceStation,Aheriandaccusedno.3HemMishrawaspresentin
Police Station, Aheri and accused no.3 Hem Mishra expressed his
desire to open his facebookaccount andpolice told himthat they
wantedtotakevideoshootingoftheactivitiesoffacebookaccountof
accusedno.3HemMishraandatthattimevideographerwaspresent
inpolicestationandaccusedno.3HemMishraopenedhisfacebook
account on the computer at Aheri Police Station and videographer
tookshootingoftheproceeding.Hestatedthataccusedno.3Hem
Mishraopenedhisfacebookaccountinfrontofthemandhehadseen
alltheactivitiesonfacebookaccountliketimelines,post,friendlist
andDySPhadtakenprintoutsofthescreenshotsofactivitiesofface
book account of accused no.3 Hem Mishra from the computer at
Police Station and thereafter, video cassette (CD) of activities was
preparedandcassettewassealedunderthepanchanamaatExh.199.

580] He stated that then police played the CDs of which

shooting dated 2682013 on computer at Police Station in his
presence and they saw two persons namely Ajaykumar and Dona
Wilsoninthe'friendlist'offacebookaccountofaccusedno.3Hem
Mishra and both of them were identified by accused no.1 Mahesh
Tirkiandno.2PanduNarote.HestatedthatboththeaccusedPandu
andMaheshtoldinfrontofpanchasandpolicethatattheinstanceof
Narmadakka they took accused no.3 Hem Mishra from Ballarsha
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
484 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

RailwaystationtoMurewadaandthereaftertheCDwastakenout
fromcomputeranditwasputbackinthesameconditionanditwas
sealedwithlabelsandtheirsignaturesandtothateffectpanchanama
(Exh.200)wasdrawn,itbearshissignature.Hestatedthatprintouts
ofthescreenshotsoffacebookaccountofHemMishraweretakenby
DeputySuperintendentofPoliceBawcheinhispresencebydrawing
panchanama dated 26.8.2013. He identified Art.no.A1 to A16
copiesofscreenshotsbeforethecourt.

581] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
Advocate.Inthecrossexaminationheadmittedthatinpanchanama
Exh.199 the date 26.9.2013 is appearing for three times and in
panchanamaExh.200thedate29.9.2013isappearingforthreetimes.
He admitted that in the panchanama dated 26.8.2013 there is no
mentionthataccusedno.3HemMishraopenedhisfacebookaccount
on the computer at Aheri Police Station. He admitted that in the
panchanamaExh.199thereisnomentionaboutthefactthataccused
no.3 Hem Mishra was present in Police Station and there is no
mention of the fact that Investigating Officer P.W.11 DySP Suhas
Bawchewasalsopresentatthetimeoftakingscreenshotsandhe
doesnotknowwhythesaidfactisnotmentionedinpanchanama
Exh.199. He admitted that it is not mentioned in panchanama
Exh.200aboutthefactthatwhenvideoshootingwastakenon268
2013itwasplayedandhedoesnotknowwhythesaidfactisnot
mentionedinpanchanamaatExh.200.Headmittedthathereadover
thecontentsofpanchanamaatExh.199anditisnotmentionedin
panchnama that accused no.3 Hem Mishra opened his face book
accountonthecomputerinPoliceStation,Aheriinhispresence.He
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
485 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

admitted that VideographerbynameRanguwasresidentofAheri

and he was already in police station when he had gone for
panchanamainpolicestation. HeadmittedthatonArt.A/15and
A/16'addfriend'iswrittenand'friend'isnotwritten.

582] HedeniedthatpanchanamaExhs.199and200werenot
preparedinhispresenceandpoliceobtainedhissignaturesonblank
papersandpreparedfalsepanchanamasandattheinstanceofpolice
hedeposedfalsely.Hedeniedthatinhispresenceaccusedno.3Hem
MishraneveropenedhisfacebookaccountandArt.15and16arenot
relatedtothefacebookaccountofaccusedno.3HemMishra.

583] Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in his

examination stated that on 2682013 it was revealed in the
interrogation with accused no.3 Hem Mishra that he is using face
bookaccount,andtherefore,hecalledpanchasandintheirpresence
accused no.3 Hem Mishra opened his facebook account on the
computerofPoliceStation,Aheriandhehadtakensomeprintoutsof
screenshotsofactivitiesoffacebookaccountofaccusedno.3Hem
Mishra and video shootings of entire proceeding was taken in the
presenceofpanchasandpanchanama(Exh.199)tothateffectwas
also prepared. After displaying the videograph the panchanama at
Exh.200wasdrawninpresenceofpanchasandaccused.

584] InhiscrossexaminationSuhasBawche(P.W.11)hasstated
thatbymistakethedate26.9.2013and29.9.2013werementionedin
panchanama(Exh.199and200)insteadof26.8.2013and29.8.2013.
Except this there is no cross examination on this point that on
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
486 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

26.08.2013accuseddidnotopenfacebookaccountonthecomputer
at Aheri Police Station and activities of his facebook account was
seen and print outs of screen shots were not taken under the
panchanamaExh.199.

SubmissionofSpl.PPSathainathanonactivitiesoffacebook
accountofaccusedno.3HemMishra

585] ThelearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathianathansubmittedthatthe
prosecutionhasprovedthefactthataccusedno.3HemMishrawas
maintaining facebook account and on 26.08.2013 during
interrogationbyInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheheshowed
hiswillingnesstoopenhisfacebookaccountoncomputeratAheri
Police Station. Thereafter, panchwitnessP.W.4ShrikantGaddewar
another panch was called in Police Station, Aheri and in Police
Station,Aheriaccusedno.3HemMishraopenedhisfacebookaccount
in presence of panch witness P.W.4 Shrikant Gaddewar and the
activitiesofthefacebookaccountofaccusedno.3HemMishrawere
seen by panch P.W.4 Shrikant Gaddewar, another panch and
Investigating Officer P.W.11 SuhasBawche andprintoutsof screen
shotsweretakenatArt.A1toA16andthevideoshootingofthesaid
proceedingwastakenandCDofsaidvideoshootingwasprepared.It
issubmittedthatinthepresentcasethevideographerwhorecorded
thevideographyofsaidproceedingisnotexaminedandtheCDwas
not produced on record and there are some mistakes in dates in
panchanama at Exh.199, that is, instead of date 26.08.2013, date
26.09.2013ismentioned,andthatisnotfataltotheprosecutioncase.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
487 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

586] Hesubmittedthatonperusalofprintoutsofthescreen
shotsofactivitiesoffacebookaccountofaccusedno.3HemMishraat
Art. A1 to A16, it is clear that there are photographs and posts
relatingtonaxalactivitiesandthenamesofaccusedno.6Saibabaand
RonaWilson(MaoistinNepal)areappearinginthefriendlistofface
bookaccountofaccusedno.3HemMishra.Hesubmittedthatfrom
theprintoutsofscreenshot(Art.A9)itisclearthatthereiscondemn
the death penalty of Afzal Guru and Red salute to the National
LiberationstruggleinKashmir!andfromArtA8showsthecontents
KashmirwasneverpartofIndiaandinArt11itissuggestedthat
NaxalismisthesolutionandNaxalbariistheonlyway.Thisshows
that the accused no.3 Hem Mishra is active member of banned
organisation CPI Maoist and its frontal organisation RDF and by
posting and uploading such photographs having above mentioned
commentshewaspromotingnaxalismandincitingpeopletocreate
violence and caused public disorder and disaffection towards
GovernmentestablishedbylawandtheprovisionsofSections13,18,
20,38and39ofUAPAarealsoattractedagainstaccusedno.3Hem
Mishra.

ArgumentofShriGadlingfortheaccusedonfacebook

587] Ontheotherhand,learnedAdvocateShriGadlingforthe
accused submitted that in panchanamas (Exh.199) the date is
mentionedas26.9.2013andtherearesomescratchesonitandafter
thatoverwritingismadeandafterthatdate26.8.2013iswrittenand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
488 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

this is not a mistake but it is clear that the said panchanama is

antetimed.HesubmittedthatP.W.4ShrikantGaddewarisahabitual
panch witness of police. Further, panch witness P.W.4 Shrikant
Gaddewarinhiscrossexaminationadmittedthatinthepanchanama
Exh.199 there is no mention that accused no.3 Hem Mishra was
presentinPoliceStationandheopenedhisfacebookaccountonthe
computer at Aheri Police Station and then screenshots of the
activities of facebook account of accused no.3 Hem Mishra were
takeninPoliceStation. Hence,theevidenceofpanchwitnessP.W.4
ShrikantGaddewarandInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawacheis
notworthtobereliedupon.

588] Hesubmittedthataccusedno.3HemMishraneveropened
his facebook account in presence of Investigating Officer P.W.11
SuhasBawcheandpanchwitnessP.W.4ShrikantGaddewarandno
printoutsofscreenshotsofactivitiesoffacebookaccountofaccused
no.3HemMishra weretakenout. Tosubstantiatethisdefencehe
submittedthataccordingtoprosecutionon26.8.2013accusedno.3
HemMishraopenedhisfacebookaccountbyenteringhisusername
inpresenceofInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheandpanch
witness P.W.4 Shrikant Gaddewar on the computer of Aheri Police
Station and printouts of screen shots of activities of facebook
accountweretakenoutandthosearefiledonrecordatArts.A1to
A16andthevideographyofsaidproceedingwasdoneandCDwas
preparedandpanchanamastothateffectwerepreparedatExh.199
and200.Hesubmittedthatneitherthevideographerwhoconducted
videography of the said proceeding was examined nor alleged CD
preparedbyP.W.11SuhasBawcheofsaidproceedingwasproduced
onrecordtoprovethesaidaspect.Hence,adverseinferencecanbe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
489 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

drawnagainsttheprosecutionthatnosuchpanchanamasweredrawn
andnothinghappenedon26.8.2013.

589] He invited attention of the Court on the printouts of

screenshotsatArtsA1toA16andsubmittedthatoneachandevery
screenshotsthedate982013isseenandthereforeitcansafelybe
saidthatthesaidscreenshotsweretakenon982013andnoton
28.8.2013asallegedbytheprosecution.Hesubmittedthatthisfactis
alsocorroboratedfromtheproposalofsanctionwhichwassenttothe
SanctioningAuthoritybyInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawche
andP.W.23RameshDhumalwhereinintheindexoflistofdocuments
atserialnos.58and53infrontofentryofprintoutsofscreenshots
of facebook account of accused no.3 Hem Mishra the date is
mentioned as 982013. He submitted that though panch witness
P.W.4ShrikantGaddewarinhisexaminationstatedthatpanchanamas
(Exh.199 and 200) were drawn on 26.8.2013 and it bears his
signatures, however both panchanamas bear the date 26.9.2013.
Fromthis,itisclearthatpanchanamawaseffectedon2692013as
allegedbytheprosecution.

590] HesubmittedthatpanchwitnessP.W.4ShrikantGaddewar
inhisexaminationatparano.3statedthatpoliceplayedtheCDdated
26.8.2013andonseeingtheCDtheysawthenameof2personsin
the friend list of face book account of accused no.3 Hem Mishra
namelyAjaykumarandDonaWilson.However,incrossexamination,
this panch witness admitted that on printouts of screenshots Art.
A/15andA/16'addfriend'iswrittenand'friend'isnotwritten.He
alsoinvitedattentionoftheCourtonprintoutsofscreenshotsArt.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
490 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

A/15andA/16andsubmittedthatintheArt.A/15andA/16before
the name of Ajaykumarand DonaWilsonthere ismentionof'add
friend'andnot'friend'hencetheyarenotaddedasfriend.Hence,the
contentionoftheprosecutionisnotbelievablethataccusedno.3Hem
MishrahasrelationswithAjaykumarandDonaWilson.

Conclusiononfacebookactivitiesofaccusedno.3HemMishra

591] Theprosecutionreliedonthecopiesoftheprintoutsof
screenshotsoffacebookaccountofaccusedno.3HemMishrataken
byP.W.11SuhasBawache,whichareasfollows:

i] ArticleA1 revealsthatnameofaccusedno.3
HemMishraandhisphotographisappearingashis
profile.
ii] ArticleA2 revealsthatbelowheadfollowing
groupsareappearing
GROUPS
CCSEAS 10
Naxalbari.....therev...20+
JNUUttarakhand
i=dkj Praxis 13
HumanitiesUndergro.....20+
MulnivasiKarmachari...20+
Hkkjrh; i=dkj Indian...20+
SocialJusticeForum20+
PahariForum
FreeSoniSoriandLi...20+
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
491 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

AISA2
CampaignagainstD.....20+
CreateGroup.....

iii] ArticleA3 in all 12 photographs are

appearing and in two photographs dead bodies of
personsarelyingandinonephotographappearing
REPEALUAPAandintwophotographsaccusedno.3
HemMishraareappearingandthereisphotograph
ofonemanandinonephotographredsaluteis
mentioned and in another photographs it is
mentioned that The Four Year Undergraduate
Programme!

iv] ArticleA4 reveals that it is in the name of

accused Hem Mishra and he uploaded 12
photographsandinonephotographsomematteris
written below heading Saffron Terror and in
another photograph some matter is written below
headingReleaseAllMembersofKabirKalaManch
andintwophotographsaccusedno.3HemMishra
shownplayingDafli.

v] ArticleA5 reveals that it is in the name of

accused Hem Mishra and he uploaded one
photographofpamphlethavingpictureofonelady
and between the matter one slogan is written as,
WomenholduphalftheskyMao.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
492 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

vi] ArticleA6 reveals that accused no.3 Hem

Mishra uploaded 12 photographs and in one
photograph accused no.3 Hem Mishra shown
alongwith other 3/4 persons and one lady is
addressingfromdais.

vii] ArticleA7 reveals that it is in the name of

accusedHemMishraandoneSrirupaBhattacharya
tagged one photo with Priya Darshan and Hem
MishraandinthephotographaccusedHemMishra
isshownplayinginstrument(Dafli)withonelady.

viii] ArticleA8 reveals that it is in the name of

accused no.3 Hem Mishra and one Parijat Pratik
tagged one photo and in the said photograph
accused Hem is shown standing near one person
holdingbanneronwhichitiswrittenas,KASHMIR
WAS NEVER PART OF INDIA and one lady was
holdingmikenearbystreet.

ix] ArticleA9 reveals that it is in the name of

accusedno.3HemMishraandDemocraticStudents
Union uploaded one photoandaccusedno.3Hem
Mishralikethisphoto. Inthesaidphotographone
photoofAfzalGuruandthematter,Condemnthe
murder of Afzal Guru!, Red salute to the national
liberationstruggleinKashmiriswrittenandatthe
bottomthereismentionasMartyrsarenotburied
theyaresown.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
493 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

x] ArticleA10 reveals that it is in the name of

accused no.3 Hem Mishra and he uploaded 12
photographsandinonephotographitiswrittenas,
Naxalism is not the problem but the solution!,
NaxalbariEkHiRasta.

xi] ArticleA11 revealsthatitisinthenameof

accused no.3 Hem Mishra and one Umar Khalid
uploadedonephotoandaccusedno.3Hemlikedthis
photo.Inthesaidphotographitiswrittenas,The
white man called you Bhagat Singh that day The
black man calls you Naxalite today But everyone
willcallyouTheMorningstartomorrowSriSri
NAXALISM is not The problem but the Solution!
NAXALBARIEKHIRASTA!DSU.

xii] ArticleA12 reveals that it is in the name of

accused no.3 Hem Mishra and he uploaded 12
photographsandononephotographitiswrittenas,
Freedom for Kashmir, Manipur, Nagalim, Elam
Palestine!....

xiii] ArticleA13 reveals that in the 'friend list'

name of six persons are appearing i.e. Pan Bohra,
Kunal Pargai, Aneeb PA, Kanchan Joshi, Krishna
PophaleandPriyankaGoswami.

xiv] ArticleA14 revealsthatitisinthenameof

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
494 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accusedno.3HemMishraandinbasicinformation
column,infrontofpoliticalviewsitismentioned
as MarxistLeninistMaoist and further in the
column of Contact Information mobile
No.9873877513 belonging to accused no.3 Hem
Mishraisshown.

xv] ArticleA15 revealsthatitisinthenameof
accused no.3 Hem Mishraandin the friendlist of
facebookofaccusedno.3HemMishra,thenameof
accused no.6 G Naga Saibaba is seen alongwith
profilepictureofphotoofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

xvi] ArticleA16 revealsthatitisinthenameof

accusedno.3HemMishraandinthe'friendlist'of
facebook of accused no.3 Hem, the name of one
RonaWilsonisseen.

592] TheevidenceofpanchwitnessShrikantGaddewar(P.W.4)
andInvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche(P.W.11)waschallengedon
the ground that panch witness Shrikant Gaddewar (P.W.4) is a
habitualpanchandthereisnomentioninthepanchanama(Exh.199)
thataccusedno.3HemMishrahimselfopenedhisfacebookaccount.
Further,itisnotmentionedinpanchanamaExh.199thatactivitiesof
facebook account of accused no.3 Hem Mishra were seen and
printoutsofthescreenshotsoffacebookaccountweretakenandthe
said printouts were not supported by certificate as required by
Sec.65B of the Indian Evidence Act. However, there is no cross
examination to Investigating OfficerSuhasBawche (P.W.11)on the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
495 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

pointthathehasnottakenscreenshotsandprintoutsoftheactivities
offacebookaccountofaccusedno.3HemMishraandhenceprintouts
weretakenandtothateffectpanchanamawaspreparedatExh.199.

593] Itiswellsettledlawthatwhenthedefencedeclinedto
availopportunitytoputhiscaseincrossexaminationonparticular
pointthenevidencetenderedbywitnesscannotberejected.Atthis
juncture it is necessary to consider observations laid down by the
ApexCourtinpara8inthecaseof SarwansingvStateofPunjab
reportedin AIR2002SC3652 whiledealingthecaseunderTADA
Act1985observedasunder:
8. Incidentally, in early nineties, terrorist activities
wereonpeakintheborderdistrictsofPunjabandit
haspracticallybeenanaxiomatictruthintheareain
question that noone wouldin fact come out of the
residentialhousesafterduskunlessperforcedat3'O
clockinthemorning. Thereexistsnootherevidence
noreventherebeinganysuggestionofexistenceofany
otherfactorforsuchperformedoutingat3a.m.Itis
aruleofessentialjusticethatwhenevertheopponent
hasdeclinedtoavailhimselfoftheopportunitytoput
hiscaseincrossexaminationitmustfollowthatthe
evidencetenderedonthatissueoughttobeaccepted.
AdecisionoftheCalcuttaHighCourtlendssupportto
the observations as above, (See in this context AEG
Carapietv.AYDerderian,AIR1961Calcutta359(P.B.
Mukherjee,J.ashethenwas)](emphasissupplied)

594] Further,theApexCourtincaseofGianChandandothers
.v.StateofHaryana reportedin (2013)14SupremeCourtCases
420 whiledealingthecaseunderNDPSActinpara15observedas
under:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
496 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

15. The defence did not put any question to the

investigatingofficerinhiscrossexaminationinrespect
of missing chits from the bags containing the case
property/contraband articles. Thus, no grievance
couldberaisedbytheappellantsinthisregard.

595] Intheabovereportedjudgmentitisfurtherobservedthat
nonexamination of independent witness is not fatal to the
prosecution case if case is proved otherwise and it was further
observedthatevidenceofpoliceofficercanbereliedifitisfoundto
bereliableanddoesnotsufferfrominfirmities.

596] TheevidenceofP.W.No.4ShrikantGaddewarrevealsthat
whenthefacebookaccountwasopenedbyaccusedno.3HemMishra
inpresenceofhehimselfandP.W.11SuhasBawche,andthereafter
Investigating Officer P.W.No.11 Suhas Bawache taken out the
printouts at the time of recordingof panchanamatothat effect at
Exh.200andvideoshootingofalltheproceedingwasdoneandCD
was prepared. However, the evidence of Investigating Officer
P.W.No.11SuhasBawacheissilentonthepointthatprintoutsofthe
screenshots of activities on facebookaccount ofaccusedno.3Hem
MishraweretakenatthetimeofdrawingofpanchanamaatExh.200.
Furtherthereisnomentioninpanchanama(Exh.200)thatprintouts
ofscreenshots,facebookaccountofaccusedno.3HemMishrawere
taken.

597] Theprintoutsoftheactivitiesonfacebookaccountof
accusedno.3HemMishraarefiledonrecord.TheyareatArts.A1to
A16.Thesaidprintoutsdonotbearthesignaturesofpanchwitness
P.W.No.4 Shrikant Gaddewar and Investigating Officer P.W.No.11
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
497 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

SuhasBawache. Inthesaidprintouts(Arts.A1toA16)thedateis
mentionedas9.08.2013.Itisimportanttonotethatinthebiosetup
of computer system, same time first month is mentioned and
thereafter date and year is mentioned. It is the contention of the
prosecution that the printouts were taken by P.W.No.11 Suhas
Bawache on 08.09.2013. There appears to be substance in the
contentionoftheprosecutionbecausetheevidenceofInvestigating
OfficerP.W.11SuhasBawacheissilentonthispointthatprintoutsof
screenshots were taken then and there at the time of drawing
panchanamaandthereisnomentioninpanchanama(Exh.200)about
the same. Had the printouts were taken at the same time there
would have been signatures of panch witness P.W.4 Shrikant
GaddewarandInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawacheonthesaid
printouts(Arts.A1toA16)buttheirsignaturesarenotappearingon
thesame. Thisshowsthattheprintoutsweretakenonsubsequent
datei.e.on8.9.2013byInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawache
from the computer installed at Aheri Police Station. If the said
contention of the prosecution is accepted as there is no certificate
attached by the Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawache to the
saidprintouts(Arts.A1toA16)asrequiredunderSection65Bofthe
Evidence Act, in view of thisArts.A1 toA16 cannot be taken into
considerationandevidenceoftheprosecutionwitnessesonthispoint
isliabletobediscarded.

Caseagainstaccusedno.4Prashant&accusedno.5Vijay

598] Itisthecaseoftheprosecutionthat on1.9.2013police

officersRajendraTiwari(P.W.14)TiwariandRameshYede(P.W.8) of
PoliceStation,Chichgad,Dist.Gondiawerepatrollinginborderarea
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
498 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

of Chhattisgad near Rajnandgaon for search of accused Pahadsing

who waswantedinCrime No.39/2011ofPoliceStation,Chichgad
and at that time they received message on their mobile that the
accused in Crime no.3017/2013 of Police Station, Aheri were in
Raipurareaandhence,theyproceededtoRaipurandtheycameto
know that the accused involved in crime no.3017/2013 had gone
towardsDevaribyfourwheelervehicleandtherefore,theyhadgone
towards Devari and at Chichgad Tpoint they found accused no.4
Prashant Rahi and no.5 Vijay Tirki as per the description given to
themandhence,theyaccostedthemandtookaccusedno.4Prashant
Rahiandno.5VijayTirkitoAheriPoliceStationandhandedoverto
P.W.11 PSI Bawche who arrested both accused and from the
possessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahieightpapersrelatingMaoist
literatureandtypedwrittenpapersinrespectofundertrialprisoner
Maoist leader Narayan Sanyal were seized under panchanama
(Exh.179)andfrompossessionofaccusedno.5VijayTirki,thearticles
like pieces of paper (Art.131A to 131D), daily newspaper Dainik
Bhaskar dated 1.9.2013 (Art.132) were seized under panchanama
(Exh.179).

EVIDENCE

599] Inordertosubstantiatethiscasetheprosecutionreliedon
theevidenceof
1] PoliceInspectorRajendrakumarParmanandTiwari
(P.W.14)atExh.307
2] HeadConstableRameshYede(P.W.8)atExh.223
3] InvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche(P.W.11)atExh.235
4] PanchwitnessUmajiKisanChandankhede(P.W.3)at
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
499 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Exh.178
5] MuddemalClerkofAheriPoliceStation
GaneshRathod(P.W.13)atExh.297

600] Rajendrakumar Parmanand Tiwari (P.W.14) was Police

InspectorofPoliceStationChichgad,Tah.Devri,District:Gondia.He
wasonpatrollingalongwithHeadConstableRameshYede(P.W.8)at
borderareaofChhattisgad. InhisexaminationatExh.307hehas
statedthaton1.9.2013hehadbeentoborderareaofChhattisgad
nearRanjnandgaonforsearchofaccusedPahadsingwhowaswanted
in Crime No.39/2011 of Police Station, Chichgad and he received
messageonmobilethattheaccusedinCrimeno.3017/2013ofPolice
Station, Aheri were in Raipur area and so, he alongwith Police
ConstableP.W.8RameshYede proceededtoRaipurandhecameto
knowthattheaccusedinvolvedinthiscasehadgonetowardsDevari
byfourwheelervehicleandtherefore,theyhadgonetowardsDevari
and at ChichgadT point they found two persons as per the
descriptiongiventothemandhence,theytookthemintocustody.
The personal search of accusedno.4Prashant Rahiand no.5Vijay
Tirki was taken and in possession of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi
papersofnaxalliteraturewerefound.TothateffectP.W.14Rajendra
TiwarigavewrittenreportatExh.241inDevariPoliceStation. He
statedthatasper directionsofP.W.11SuhasBawche,SDPOAheri,
theyproceededtowardsAheriandreachedAherion2.9.2013at5.00
a.m. and they handed over those two persons i.e. accused no.4
Prashantandno.5VijayTirkiinthecustodyofSDPOSuhasBawche
(P.W.11)andentrytothateffectwastakeninAheriPoliceStation.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
500 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

601] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel. In his crossexamination he admitted that at ChichgadT
point,therewereteastallsandpanshopsandtheydidnotmakeany
arrestpanchanamawhentheaccusedwerearrestedandthepersonal
searchofboththeaccusedwasnottaken. Hedeniedthatboththe
accusedwerenotarrestedatChichgadTpointandhehadfiledfalse
reportagainsttheminDevriPoliceStation andhehadnothanded
overthemtoInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SDPOSuhasBawche,Aheri.
He denied that he arrested accused no.4 Prashant Rahi in Raipur
Court.

602] PoliceConstableRameshKolujiYede(P.W.8)wasattached
to Police Station, Chichgad, Tah.Devri, District : Gondia as Head
Constable and was on patrolling duty alongwith P.W.14
RajendrakumarTiwari. InhisexaminationatExh.223hehasstated
thaton192013he waspatrollingwithintheforestarea situated
nearborderofChhattisgadandMaharashtraandatthattime,P.W.14
Police Inspector Rajendrakumar Tiwari received message that the
wanted naxals were proceeding towards Devari from Raipur, and
therefore,theytookvehicletowardsDevriandhaltedvehicleatDevri
onChichgadTpointandatthatplace,P.W.14PITiwari,himselfand
staff got down from the vehicle and they saw two persons were
standingthere.Theyenquiredwiththosetwopersons,however,they
gaveevasivereply,andthereafter,onenquirytheytoldtheirnamesas
Prashant Rahi and Vijay Tirki, hence, they were brought in Devri
Police Station and entry to that effect wasmade in Police Station,
Devri and thereafter P.W.14 PI Tiwari informed about the same to
P.W.11SDPOBawche.HestatedthatP.W.11SDPOBawchetoldP.W.14
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
501 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

PITiwaritobringthoseaccusedtoAheriPoliceStationandthereafter
onnextdayearlyinthemorningtheyreachedtoAheriPoliceStation
alongwithaccusedno.4Prashantandno.5Vijay.Thereafter,P.W.14PI
Tiwarihandedoveraccusedno.4Prashantandno.5VijaytoP.W.11
SDPOBawche.

603] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel.Inhiscrossexamination,headmittedthattheydidnotgoto
Aheri Police Station and he does not remember whether they had
gonetoSDPOofficeAheriorPoliceStation,Aheriandtheydidnotgo
tosearchPahadsingonChattisgadborderon1.9.2013. Hedenied
thattheyhadgonetoRaipurCourt.Headmittedthatatadistance
of300feetoftheTpointtherearePanthelasandTstallsandthereis
footpathof50feetadjacenttotheroad.Hedeniedthathedidnot
arrest any person on 192013 and he did not go to the Tpoint
alongwithP.W.14RajendrakumarTiwariandthosepersonswerenot
takentoAheriPoliceStation.

604] UmajiKisanChandankhede(P.W.3),thepanchwitnessis
examinedatExh.178.Heinhisexaminationhasstatedthathewas
calledbyAheripoliceon292013andhewenttothePoliceStation,
Aheriatabout5.45p.m.andatthattime,policeofficerShriBawche
(P.W.11) and two accused were present in the Police Station and
policeintroducedhimtheirnamesasPrashantRahiandVijayTirki.
Hestatedthatpoliceinitiallytookpersonalsearchofaccusedno.4
PrashantRahiandfromhispossessiononemoneypursecontaining
Rs.8,800/, onevisitingcard, drivinglicense,onePancard, one
Yatricard,onenewspaperbynameDainikBhaskarwereseizedunder
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
502 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

theseizurepanchanama(Exh.179).Hefurtherstatedthatthereafter
policetookpersonalsearchofaccusedno.5VijayTirkiandfromhis
possessiononemobilephoneofsilvercolour,Rs.5,000/cash, four
piecesofpaperonwhichphonenumberswerewritten,dailynews
paper Dainik Bhaskar were seized under seizure panchanama
(Exh.180).

605] This witness has identified the property seized in his

presence from the personal search of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi.
Thesaidarticlesare
i] DrivinglicenseinthenameofPrashantRahi(Art.124),
ii] PancardinthenameofPrashantRahi(Art.125),
iii] Yatricard(Art.126),
iv] Onepurse(Art.127),
v] OnenewspaperDainikBhaskar,dated192013
(Art.128),
vi] Twelvevisitingcards(Art.129),
vii] Oneblueplasticfileseizedfromthepossessionof
accusedPrashant(Art.130).

606] Hefurtheridentifiedthepropertyseizedinhispresence
fromthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.5VijayTirki.Thesaidarticles
are

i] Fourpiecesofpapercollectivelymarked
(Art.131Ato131/D)
ii] OnenewspaperofDainikBhaskardated192013
(Art.132)

607] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel.Inhiscrossexaminationheadmittedthatheisanilliterate
personandhecannotreadandwriteMarathiandHindiandhewas
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
503 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

calledinAheriPoliceStationforcleaningtheofficepremisesfor20to
25timesandbeforetheincidenthemighthavegonetoAheriPolice
Stationforpanchanamafor4to5timestoactasapanchandAheri
Policeusedtocallhimtoactasapanchwhenevertheyneeded.He
furtheradmittedhehadattendedtheCourtforfourtofivetimesfor
evidence.Hedoesnotrememberthedateonwhichthepanchanamas
(Exh.179 and 180) were prepared. He denied that he acted as a
panch for 20 to 25 times in respect of Aheri Police Station. He
deniedthatnopanchanamawaseffectedinhispresenceon292013
andhedeposedfalselyattheinstanceofpolice.

608] The Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche (P.W.11), Sub

Divisional Police Officer, Aheri in his examination at Exh.235 has
statedthaton292013accusedno.4PrashantRahiandno.5Vijay
TirkiwerebroughtbyP.W.14APITiwariandhisstaffofPoliceStation,
Chichgad,Dist.GondiatoPoliceStation,Aheriandthereafter,hetook
personal search of the accused no.4 Prashant Rahi and no.5 Vijay
Tirki and panchanamas were prepared and things found on their
personwereseizedbyhiminpresenceofpanchasvideExh.179and
Exh.180.Hestatedthathearrestedaccusedno.4PrashantRahiand
no.5VijayTirkiandpreparedarrestpanchanamas(Exh.239&240)
tothateffect withthehelpoftwopanchasandon292013P.W.14
APITiwariofP.S.ChichgadsubmittedreportvideExh.241aboutthe
actiontakenbyhiminrespectoftwopersonsofDevarinamelyRavi
@PrashantRahis/oN.B.SangalikarandPrasad@VijayNanTirki.
Thereafteron292013herecordedstatementsoftheraidingparty
whohadbroughtaccusedno.4PrashantRahiandno.5VijayTirkito
PoliceStation,Aheri.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
504 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

609] Hestatedthatfromthepossessionofaccusedno.5Vijay
Tirki on 292013, one mobile phone, cash of Rs.5,000/ and four
chitswithmobilenumbersmentionedonit,oneNewsPaperdated1
92013 were seized under panchanama at Exh.179 and from the
possession of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi, one money purse
containingsomecash,somevisitingcards,oneYatri(travel)card,
onerailwayticket fromNizamuddintoRaipur,xeroxcopiesoftwo
newspaper,DainikBhaskardated192013,onetransparentfileofsky
bluecolour,somedocumentspertainingtoarrestofnaxalNarayan
Sanyal, some documents concerning jail accused, three stapled
documentstotaleightpagesrelatingtonaxalactivities, Pancardin
the name of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi were seized under
panchanamaatExh.179.

610] He stated that one news was published on 1992013

relatingtonaxalinIndianExpressandthesourceofthenewswas
reporterAshutoshBhardwajandthecontentsofthesaidnewswere
relatingtoaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.Xeroxcopyofnewspublished
in Indian Express ismarked atArt.145andthecontinuingpageis
markedat Art.145A. He statedthat,on 5102013hesentEmail
(Exh.259)toreporterAshutoshBhardwajfromhisofficialEmailID
askingforsourcedocumentonthebasisofwhichhepreparedthe
said news and said reporter sent email and further attached the
documentsalongwiththemailwhichwasreceivedon18102013.He
stated that during investigation he received certified copies of
NanakmattaPoliceStation,UdhamsingNagarDistrictregardingfiling
of criminal cases against accused no.4 Prashant Rahi. They are in
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
505 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

respectofCrimeno.134/07,P.S.Nanakmatta,Dist.UdhamsingNagar.
Thiswitnessidentifiedallthearticleswhichwereseized fromthe
possessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.Theseare
i] Drivinglicense(Art.124),
ii] Pancard(Art.125)
iii] Yatricard(Art.126),
iv] Onebrowncolouredmoneypurse(Art.127)
v] OneDainikBhaskarnewspaper,dated192013(Art.128)
vi] 12visitingcards(Art.129)
vii] Oneplasticfile(Art.130)containingfourenvelopswith
onerailwayticketofSamtaExpressofNizamuddinto
Raipur,documentsrelatingtonaxalNarayanSanyal,
viii] Eightpagesofliteratureinrelationtonaxal(Art.130A)

611] This witness further identified the articles which were

seizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.5VijayTirki.Theseare
i] Piecesofpaper(Art.131Ato131D),
ii] DailynewspaperDainikBhaskardt.1.9.2013(Art.132)

612] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counselatlength.Inhiscrossexaminationheadmittedthathehad
investigatedotheroffencesunderUAPA priortothisoffenceandas
pertheprovisionsofUAPAwithin48hoursseizurehastobereported
to the designated authority.He admitted that he had not reported
seizurewithin48hourstoDesignatedauthoritybuthehadreported
thesametoSuperintendentofPoliceandJ.M.F.C.Aheriasthearticles
seizedwerenotexplosivesubstancebuttheseareordinaryarticles.
Headmittedthathedidnotgivethecopyofpanchanamatoaccused
no.5Vijayregardingpanchanamaofseizure. Hedeniedthathedid
notseizeanyarticlesinthiscaseandhencehedidnotcommunicate
thesametodesignatedauthority.Hedeniedthatnothingwasseized
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
506 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

from the possession of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi and false

panchanamawaspreparedtothateffect.Hedeniedthatnothingwas
foundinpossessionofaccusedno.5Vjayandthereisnoconcernof
accusedno.5Vijaywiththemobilenumbersfoundinhispossession.

613] Head Constable P.W.13 Ganesh Rathod, the Muddemal

ClerkofAheriPoliceStationinhisexaminationatExh.298statedthat
on 292013 Mr. Bawche SDPO (P.W.11) deposited muddemal
propertyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahii.e.
one packet containing amount of Rs.8819/, pan card, yatri card,
drivinglicenseand12visitingcards,DailynewspaperDainikBhaskar,
onebluecolourtransparentplasticcolourfilecontainingdocuments
ofNarayanSanyal,Railwayticketdated31.8.2013andeightpagesof
naxalliteratureincrimeno.3017/2013intheMalkhana.

614] He stated that P.W.11 Suhas Bawche had deposited

propertyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.5VijayTirkii.e.
one mobile of Intex company of silver colour, cash amount of
Rs.5000/anddailynewspaperDainikBhaskardated1.9.2013and
four pieces of paper having some phone numbers in crime
no.3017/2013intheMalkhanaofAheriPoliceStation.Theproperty
wasinsealedcondition.Theentryofthepropertyseizedfromthe
possession of accusedno.4 PrashantRahiandno.5VijayTirkiwas
taken in Malkhana Muddemal Register of Police Station, Aheri at
Exh.276Bondated2.9.2013atSr.no.13isasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
507 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Propertyseizedfromaccusedno.4PrashantRahi

i] one packet containing amount of Rs.8819/,

pancard,travel card,drivinglicenseand12visiting
cards
ii] DainikBhaskarnewspaper
iii] one blue coloured plastic transparent file
containingtype written documents in connection
withMaoistleaderNarayan Sanyal, railway ticket
dtd.31.8.2013
iv] Eight pages containing naxal literature in
Englishlanguage.

Propertyseizedfromaccusedno.5VijayTirki
i] onesilvercolourIntexcompanymobilephone
ii] cashamountRs.5000/
iii] Four pieces of newspaper Dainik Bhaskar
bearingsomephonenumbers.Incolumnno.11,itis
mentioned that said properties were deposited on
13.10.2015intheCourt.

615] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel. In his crossexamination he admitted that he cannot say
withoutseeingregisterwhodepositedthepropertywithhiminwhich
Crime number. He admitted that in the invoice challan it is not
mentionedthatpropertywassealedandmakeofthesealwasnot
mentioned. He admitted that he did not make entry in writing
aboutthefactthattheclerkoftheDistrictcourtaskedhimtoopen
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
508 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

thesealwhiledepositingtheproperty. Headmittedthatthereare
some overwriting in the muddemal register made by him at two
places and when the property was deposited in Malkhana, at that
time, it was sealed and make ofthe seal wasnot mentioned. He
deniedthaton892013hemadeentryattheinstanceofSDPOShri
Bawche.Hedeniedthatasthepropertywasnotinsealedcondition
andmakeofthesealwasnotmentioned,hencehedidnotmention
thesameinmuddemalregister.

ArgumentofSpl.P.P.inrespectofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.

616] LearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathianathaninrespectofaccused
no.4 Prashant Rahi submitted that during the interrogation with
accusedno.3HemMishra,involvementofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi
was revealed. Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche came to
knowthataccusedno.4PrashantRahiwascomingtoDevriChichgad
area and this fact is stated by P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in his
examination. Further, from the evidence of P.W.14 Rajendrakumar
TiwariitisclearthathereceivedmessagefromP.W.11SuhasBawche
that two persons were coming to Devri Chichgad area who were
requiredinCrimeNo.3017/2013ofAheriPoliceStationandasked
themtotakesearchofthem.InpursuanceofthesameP.W.8Ramesh
YedeandP.W.no.14RajendrakumarTiwariwhilesearchingaccused
Pahadsing who was required in crime no.39/2011 of P.S.Chichgad,
they found two persons near Chichgad Tpoint as per description
giventotheminsuspiciouscircumstances. Oninquirytheydidnot
giveproperanswershencetheyaccostedthemandintheirpossession
somedocumentsrelatingtonaxalliteraturewerefound.Thereafter,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
509 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

P.W.8RameshYedeandP.W.14RajendrakumarTiwaricametoAheri
PoliceStationbyGovernmentvehiclealongwiththosetwosuspected
personsandatabout5a.m.theyhandedoveraccusednos.4Prashant
andno.5VijaytoP.W.11S.D.P.O.SuhasBawche.Tothateffectreport
wasgivenbyP.W.14RajendrakumarTiwariatExh.241.

617] He further submitted that from the evidence of P.W.11

Suhas Bawche and panch witness P.W.3 Umaji Chandankhede it is
clearthatpersonalsearchofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiwastaken
andfromhispossessiondrivinglicenseinthenameofaccusedno.4
PrashantRahi,Pancardinthenameofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi,
Yatricard, onepurse,one newspaperDainikBhaskardated19
2013, twelve visiting cards, one blue plastic file containing eight
documentsrelatingtonaxalandmaoistliteraturewereseized.

618] The plastic file is marked at Article130 and eight

documents alongwith type written papers of under trial prisoner
MaoistleaderNarayanSanyalfoundinthesaidfilearemarkedat
Article130Aandtothateffect questionswereputtoaccusedno.4
Prashant Rahi in his statement u/s 313 of Cr.P.C. He further
submittedthat this factisalsoprovedfromthe evidence ofpanch
witnessUmajiChandankhede(P.W.3)whostatedinhisexamination
aboutarrestofaccusedno.4Prashantandseizureofarticlesfromhis
possession and he admitted the contents of the panchanama
(Exh.179).Hesubmittedthatthoughthedate18thAugustasstated
byP.W.11Suhasismentionedinsteadof28thAugustbutbecauseof
loss of memory the date was wrongly written by P.W.11 Suhas
Bawche.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
510 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

619] He invited attention of the Court on eight documents

collectively marked at Article130A, document relating to Brief
ReviewofFCinwhichtheresponsibilitiesofFCallottedtoJaddu
andChetanintheFCmeetingwerementioned.Hefurtherreliedon
thedocumentatArticleA21seizedfromthepossessionofaccused
no.3HemMishrainwhichthenameChetanisusedinreferenceto
accusedno.6Saibabaandinsecondparagraphofthesaiddocument
thereisreferenceofJitenMurandiwhoisfacingdeathpenaltyand
thisfactisalsocorroboratedfromvideoclipfoundinharddiscEx.3
seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba,accusedno.4
PrashantRahiwasseenattendingthesaidprogrammeandinanother
videoclipatEx.3accusedno.4PrashantRahiwasseenonthedias.

620] HefurtherinvitedattentionofthisCourtonthedocument
titled as Resolution of CF meeting on 07.06.2013 at Art.130A
wherein it was agreed that accused no.4 Prashant Rahi should be
given one book stall at Delhi to facilitate proper maintenance and
thereareseveralphotographsofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiwhich
werefoundintheharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccused
no.6Saibabawhileattendingmeetings,addressinggatheringswhich
showsthatheisincontactwithaccusedno.6Saibaba. Hefurther
invited attention of this court on photograph found in harddisc
(Ex.3)seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabainwhich
accusedno.4PrashantRahiwasseenonthestageunderbannerof
RDFandinthevideoclipfoundinharddisc(Ex.3)seizedfromhouse
search of accused no.6 Saibaba, accused no.4 Prashant Rahi was
calledondaisascomradebelowthebannerofRDF.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
511 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

621] LearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathianathansubmittedthattheCDR
ofmobileSIMcardbearingno.8394875017ofaccusedno.4Prashant
RahiwasprovedthroughtheevidenceofNodelOfficerRaviKhemraj
Pardeshi (P.W.16), who in his examination stated that the CDR
Exh.332wasissuedbyhiscompanyunderthesignatureofFransis
Parera, AlternateNodalOfficerandfromtheCDRreportitreveals
thatthelastlocationofCDRofmobileSIMofaccusedno.4Prashant
Rahion18thAugust2013waswithinlocationofDelhiUniversityand
theCDRofmobileofaccusedno.6Saibababearingno. 8800100490
and CDR report is admitted by defence at Exh.413 and the cross
examinationofP.W.No.22ManojPatilisdeclinedbythedefenceand
fromCDRreportofaccusedno.6SaibabaatExh.413itisclearthaton
06.09.2012, 19.05.2013, 21.05.2013, 03.06.2013, 04.06.2013,
04.07.2013, 05.07.2013, 08.07.2013, 09.07.2013, 30.07.2013,
31.07.2013and14.08.2013accusedno.6Saibabamadephonecall
fromhismobileSIMno.8800100490tomobileSIMno.8394875017
ofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.Further,fromCDRreportofaccused
SaibabaatExh.413itisclearthataccusedno.4PrashantRahimade
phone calls to accused no.6 Saibaba on his mobile SIM no.
8800100490on13.9.2012,4.7.2013,5.7.2013and14.8.2013. He
submitted that CDR details (Exhs.330 and 413), the prosecution
establishedthat the accusedno.3HemMishra,no.4Prashant Rahi
andno.6Saibabamadephonecallstoeachotheronseveraldatesand
wereincontactwitheachotherandthisisimportantinviewofdenial
ofaccusedno.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahiandno.6Saibabain
their statement under section 313 of Cr.P.C. that they had any
connectionwitheachother.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
512 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

622] HesubmittedthatthroughtheevidenceofNodalOfficer
P.W.16RaviPardeshitheprosecutionhasprovedthatmobileSIMcard
bearing no. 8394875017 was issued on the basis of customer
application form at Exh.335 to accused no.4 Prashant Rahi. He
submittedthattheevidenceofthiswitnessonthepointofissuing
mobileSIMcardbearingno.8394875017toaccusedno.4Prashant
Rahi and submission of customer application forms alongwith
photographasphotoIDproofbyaccusedno.4PrashantRahi,isnot
challengedbythedefenceandassuchtheprosecutionhasprovedthe
factthatthemobileSIMcardbearingno.8394875017wasbelonging
toaccusedno.4PrashantRahiandfromCDRReports(Exhs.330and
413)itisprovedthataccusedno.4PrashantRahiandaccusedno.6
Saibabawereincontactwitheachother.

623] Hesubmittedthatfromtheabovefactsandevidenceon
record and from videoclips and CDR it is clear that accused no.4
PrashantRahiisactivememberofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)
anditsfrontalorganisationRDFandincriminalconspiracywithother
accusedhewascommunicatingwithpeopleandhewasincitingand
instigatingthepeopleforcommittingviolenceandhisinvolvementis
establishedand therefore theingredientsoftheoffence punishable
underSection13,18,20,38,39ofUAPAr/wSec.120BoftheIPCare
attractedagainstaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.

ArgumentoflearnedAdvocateShriGadlingforaccusedno.4
PrashantRahi

624] Per contra, the learned Advocate Shri Gadling for the
accused submitted that the evidence of panch witness P.W.3 Umaji
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
513 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Chandankhedeissilentonthepointofseizureofarticle130Afrom
thepossessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.Hesubmittedthatthis
witnessneversaysthattherewereeightnaxalpamphletsbutheonly
says that said file contains railway ticket, xerox paper and empty
envelope and indirectly this witness denied that blue plastic file
containedeightnaxalpapersandthishasbeenfalselyplantedbythe
investigatingagencyagainstaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.Onperusal
ofpanchanamaExh.180itshowsthatitwasstartedat6.00hoursand
completedat6.30hourson2.9.2013.

625] He submitted that in para no.2 at Exh.307 of cross

examination of P.W.14 Rajendrakumar Tiwari he admitted that at
ChichgadTpoint,thereareTstalls,panshopsaresituatedandhedid
not make any arrest panchanama when the accused were arrested
andhehasnotgivenanyexplanationastowhypanchanamawasnot
preparedatthespotandfurtherthepanchwitnessP.W.3Umajiinhis
examinationstatedthatpanchnamawaspreparedintheeveningtime
at545p.m.Thisshowsthataccusedwerenotarrestedon192011
andfurtherthetimeofarrestwasalsonotmentionedinthestation
diaryentry.Thisshowsthatthepanchanamawasnotcarriedouton
thespotasInvestigatingOfficerwantedtoplantconcoctedstoryof
arrest and seizure of alleged articles i.e. naxal papers from the
possessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.Hesubmittedthatfromthe
evidence of this witness it is clear that on 1.9.2013 they were
patrollingnearRajnandgaonsituatedontheChhatisgarhborderand
accordingtoP.W.8RameshYedetheywerepatrollingintheforestarea
nearborderofChhatisgarh.Hence,theyhadnooccasiontocometo
ChichgadTpoint.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
514 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Conclusionforaccusedno.4PrashantRahi

626] Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in his

examinationstatedthatwhileinterrogatingwithaccusedno.3Hem
Mishra he came to know about the involvement of accused no.4
PrashantRahianditwasfurtherrevealedthataccusedno.4Prashant
RahiwascomingtoDevriChichgadTpointarea.Hence,heinformed
thisfacttoP.W.8RameshYedeandP.W.14RajendraTiwariofDevri
Police Station on their mobile phones with the description of the
accusedandP.W.8RameshYedeandP.W.14RajendraTiwariintheir
examination stated that while they were searching accused
PahadsinghinCrimeNo.39/2011ofDevriPoliceStationtheycameto
know that accused no.4 Prashant Rahi required in Crime
no.3017/2013 of Aheri Police Station had gone to Devri by four
wheelerandthereforeP.W.8RameshYedeandP.W.14RajendraTiwari
hadgonetowardsDevriandatChichgadTpointwheretheyfound
twopersonsinsuspiciouscircumstanceswiththedescriptiongivenby
P.W.11SuhasBawchehencetheymadeinquirywiththosepersonsand
theydidnotgiveproperexplanationoftheirpresencethere.

627] Theytookthosepersonsincustodyandtheyfoundnaxal
Maoist literature in their possession and they took them to Aheri
PoliceStationon2.9.2013at5.00a.m.andhandedoverthosetwo
personstoSDPO,AheriP.W.11SuhasBawcheandtothateffectan
entrywastakeninAheriPoliceStation. InvestigationOfficerP.W.11
SuhasBawchestatedthathetookpersonalsearchofaccusedno.4
PrashantRahiandno.5VijayTirkiandfromthepossessionofaccused
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
515 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

no.4PrashantRahidocumentcontainingeightpagesrelatingtonaxal
Maoistliteratureandotherarticleswereseized.PanchwitnessP.W.3
Umaji Chandankhede stated that panchanama was prepared in his
presenceandarticleslikePancard,Yatricard,onepurse,onenews
paperDainikBhaskardated192013,twelvevisitingcards,oneblue
plasticfilecontainingeightdocumentsrelatingtonaxalandmaoist
literaturewereseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.4Prashant
Rahi.TheplasticfileismarkedatArticle130andeightdocuments
foundinthesaidfilearemarkedatArticle130Aandtothateffect
questionswereputtoaccusedno.4PrashantRahiinthestatement
u/s313ofCr.P.C.Thisfactisalsoprovedfromtheevidenceofpanch
witnessUmajiChandankhede(P.W.3)whostatedinhisexamination
aboutarrestofaccusedno.4Prashantandseizureofarticlesfromhis
possessionvidepanchanama(Exh.179).

628] The evidence of P.W.8 Ramesh Yede, P.W.14

RajendrakumarTiwari,P.W.11SuhasBawcheandpanchP.W.3Umaji
Chandankhedewaschallengedonthegroundthatarrestpanchanama
inrespectofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiandno.5VijayTirkiwasnot
effectedatDevriChichgadTpointinpresenceofindependentpanch
witnessesthoughavailableandstationdiaryentryabouthandingover
of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi and no.5 Vijay Tirki is also not
producedonrecord.ItiswellsettledthatevidenceofPoliceOfficers
cannotbediscardedonthegroundthattheyarePoliceOfficersbutif
itisfreefrominfirmitiesitcanbebelieved.P.W.8RameshYedeand
No.14RajendraTiwariintheirexaminationclearlystatedthatwhen
theyhadgonetoChattisgarhborderareatheyreceivedmessageon
theirmobilefromSDPO,AheriP.W.11SuhasBawchewhoinformed
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
516 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

thataccusedrequiredinCrimeno.3017/2013ofAheriPoliceStation
wereinRaipurareaandthereforetheyproceededtowardRaipurand
thereafter they came to know that the accused had gone towards
Devribyfour wheeler vehicle hencetheywent thereandsawtwo
personswiththedescriptiongiventothembyP.W.11SuhasBawcheat
Chichgad Tpoint in suspicious circumstances, hence, they made
inquirywiththosepersonsandtheydidnotgiveproperexplanation
of their presence there. Hence, they took those two persons in
custodyandtheyfoundnaxalMaoistliteratureintheirpossessionand
they took them to Aheri Police Station and handed over to SDPO,
Aheri P.W.11 Suhas Bawche. Nothing is brought on record to
disbelievetheevidenceofthesewitnessestodiscardtheirevidenceon
thispoint.

629] Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche in his

examinationclearlystatedthataccusedno.4PrashantRahiandno.5
Vijay Tirki were brought to Aheri Police Station and he took their
personal search and from the possession of accused no.4 Prashant
RahiarticleslikePancard, Yatricard, onepurse,one newspaper
DainikBhaskardated192013,twelvevisitingcards,oneblueplastic
file containing eight documents alongwith type written papers of
undertrialprisonerMaoistleaderNarayanSanyalrelatingtonaxal
andmaoistliteraturewereseizedinpresenceofpanchwitnessP.W.3
Umaji Chandankhede. Though panch witness P.W.3 Umaji
Chandankhedehasnotstatedinhisexaminationabouttheseizureof
naxal literaturefrom the possessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi
but from his crossexamination it is clear that he is an illiterate
witness,hence,merenotdeposingaboutthefactofseizureofnaxal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
517 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

literature and not mentioning in detail in panchanama at Exh.179

aboutthenaxalliteratureisnotagroundtodisbelievetheevidenceof
panchwitnessP.W.3UmajiChandankhede.

630]P.W.11SuhasBawcheinhisexaminationhestatedthat
eightpagesrelatingtonaxalmaoistliteraturewereseizedfromthe
possessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiunderpanchanamaExh.179
andthesaideightpagesseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.4
PrashantRahiweredepositedonthesamedayi.e.on2.9.2013with
theMuddemalClerkofAheriPoliceStationP.W.13GaneshRathod.
Further P.W.13 Ganesh Rathod in his examination stated that he
received property i.e. eight pages of naxal maoist literature at
Art.130AandentrytothateffectwastakeninMuddemalRegisterat
Exh.276B. Hence,prosecutionhasprovedbeyondreasonabledoubt
thataccusedno.4PrashantRahialongwithaccusedno.5VijayTirki
was arrested at Devri Chichgad TPoint and they were brought to
AheriPoliceStationandthereaftertheirpersonalsearchwastaken
and eight pages of naxal Maoist literature alongwith other articles
werefoundwithaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.

631] Finding of personal documents i.e. driving license and

Pan cardwithaccusedno.4PrashantRahishowsthat hispersonal
search was taken and he was arrested. Finding of incriminating
article i.e. Yatri card (Art.126) shows that accused no.4 Prashant
RahiwasgoingfromDelhitoRaipurandfindingofnewspaperwith
himwhichwasusuallyusedbythemembersofCPI(Maoist)andits
frontal organisation RDF as identification code to recognize each
othershowsthathewasgoingtoforestareatomeetunderground
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
518 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

naxalsasallegedbytheprosecution.Furtheraccusedno.4Prashant
Rahiwasfoundinpossessionofoneblueplasticfilecontainingeight
documents relating to naxal maoist literature which is marked at
Article130Aandtothateffect questionswereputtoaccusedno.4
PrashantRahiinthestatementu/s313ofCr.P.C.buthedeniedthis
fact.

632] TheevidenceofInvestigatingOfficerP.w.11SuhasBawche
isclearonthepointthateightdocumentsrelatingtonaxalMaoist
literaturewererecoveredfromaccusedno.4PrashantRahiandthis
factismentionedinpanchanamaExh.179whereinitisstatedthat
eightpagesrelatingtonaxalMaoistliteraturewereseizedfromthe
possessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.Furtherfromtheevidence
ofMuddemalClerkofAheriPoliceStationP.W.13GaneshRathoditis
clear that he had deposited eight pages relating to naxal Maoist
literatureseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.4PrsahantRahi
andanentrytothateffectistakeninMuddemalRegisterofPolice
Station,AheriwhichisproducedonrecordatExh.276B.Nothingis
broughtonrecordbythedefencetodisbelievetheevidenceofP.W.11
SuhasBawcheandP.W.13GaneshRathodaboutseizureofeightpages
fromthepossessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahianddepositingthe
sameinMalkhanaofPoliceStation,Aheri. Asthedocumentswere
foundinpossessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiandthequestions
were put to him in his statement recorded u/s313Cr.P.C., but he
deniedthatthedocumentsmarkedasArticles130Awereseizedfrom
hispossession. Atthisjuncture,itisnecessarytoconsidertheratio
laiddowninthecaseof AshishC.Shahv.
M/s.ShethDevelopers

Pvt. Ltd. and Ors reported in 2011 Cr.L.J. 3565 wherein it is
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
519 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

observedinpara12that
(E)EvidenceAct(1of1872),S.135Examination
ofwitnessesProsecutioncanneveraskaccusedto
enterintowitnessboxaswitnessofprosecutionIt
isagainstbasicprinciplesofcriminaljurisprudence.
(Para12)

Para 12. The learned Counsel for the petitioner

vehementlycontendedthatthedocumentcouldnot
beadmittedinevidenceunlessauthorofthesame
was examined before the Court and in support of
this contention, he relied upon Vishwanath Rai v.
Sachhidamand Singh, AIR 1971 SC 1949. In that
case, witness of one party deposed that a letter
writtenbyoneStohimhadbeenreceivedbyhim.
TheSupremeCourtheldthatburdenliesonother
sidetoproveitsallegationthattheletterwasnot
writtenbySorthatitwaswrittenincollusionwith
Sandthewitness.However,theSupremeCourtalso
heldthattheletterisrelevantandadmissibletothe
extentofthefactthatSwrotesuchalettertothe
witness with its contents. However, correctness of
thecontentsoftheletterwouldbeprovedonlyby
examiningSasawitnessbecausehewastheauthor.
Inthepresentcase,theauthorandsignatoriesofthe
abovereferredtwolettersareaccusedNos.1and2.
Theletterspurportingtohavebeensignedandsent
bythemwerereceivedbytheManagingDirectorof
the complainant and this fact is deposed to by
witnessSharadDoshi.Inviewofthis,iftheaccused
personsallegethatthesaidletterswerenotsigned
and sent by the accused persons, burden lies on
them to prove the same. The contention of the
learnedCounselthatthecontentsofthisdocument
andthetruthforthesamecannotbeprovedwithout
examining the author of the same is against the
basic principles of criminal jurisprudence, because
prosecutioncanneverasktheaccusedtoenterinto
witnessboxasawitnessofprosecution.Infact,the
accusedcannotbecalledinthewitnessboxevenas
defencewitnessunlesshemakesawrittenrequest
forthesame.Notonlythis,eveninthestatement
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
520 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

under Sec. 313, Cr.P.C. wherein the incriminating

circumstancesarerequiredtobeputtotheaccused
toenable himtoexplainthesame,theaccusedis
not bound to answer those questions, though the
Courtmaydrawadverseinferenceagainsthimifhe
keepsquiet.Insuchcircumstances,tosuggestthat
thedocumentwrittenbyandsignedbytheaccused
couldnotbeprovedwithoutexaminingtheaccused
aswitnessoftheprosecutionisagainstthesettled
positionoflawandthereforethiscontentionofthe
learned Counsel for the petitioner is liable to be
rejected.

633] In view of above the eight documentsrelating tonaxal

literature and typed written documents (Arts.130A) found in
possessionofPrashantRahicanbereadinevidence.

Contents of Eight pages seized from the possession of accused

no.4PrashantRahialongwithotherdocumentsareasunder:

(1)ThedocumentistitledasResolutionoftheCF
meetingon7.6.2013
On perusal of said document at point no.8, page
no.4itismentionedthatRahiwillbetalkedtotake
upthetaskofrunningthebookstaffinthecapitalto
facilitate proper maintenance, distribution. Even
thoughhewilltakethisresponsibilityindependently
itwouldbebetterifthisisdoneincoordinationwith
the CF comrades. In this regard the Higher
Committeewillwritetohim.

(2) FurtherdocumenttitledasABriefReviewof
FCfunctioningatpageno.1itismentionedthat
Atpresenta5memberFChasbeenfunctioning.The
members are Jaddu, Chetan, Preetilata, Vilas and
Vivek. TwomoremembersoftheFChavebeenin
jailforthelast3years.Oneofthemhasbeenfacing
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
521 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

death penalty. Though High Court acquitted him,

JharkhandGovernmenthadgonetoSupremeCourt.
HeisstilllanguishinginprisonunderCrimeControl
Act which was promulgated after the High Court
acquittedhim. Thereisnoprovisionforbailunder
thisAct. Onehastobeinsideprisonforoneyear.
The government may extend it for one more year
also.

For the last three years the FC of A3 is

functioning without any guidance from the CC or
SUCOMO. TheFChasbeenmeetingregularlyand
chalking programmes and plans for all India
activities.Inthepastfouryears(Firstyearwiththe
guidanceofSUCOMOinchargethoughlettersandin
thepast3yearswithoutanyguidance)theFChas
beentakenupseveralprogrammesandinitiatives.

ThoughtheFCisconstitutedtoworkforthe
A3, it has been working as though it is a party
committeebecauseitlooksafteratleast3Tactical
UnitedFronts(TUFs)3otherMosandinternational
workalongwithA3itself.EachmemberoftheFCis
workingforoneTUFatleastfullyfocussingonit.As
a result, a number of tasks taken up by the FC
remainunfulfilledandnoneoftheTUFsisworking
fullyinitsstrength. Butatleastwemanagetoput
up bigger programmes or at least use our loud
mouths against the state offensives. At the same
timedonotloseinitiativeintheTUFsandotherjoint
activities.

In addition to the work in TUFs, it has been

alsodoingtheinternationalworkcampaignsand
coordination earlier under the guidance of
InternationalDepartmentnowwithoutanyguidance
continuingwithwhatwasdecidedpreviously.

ToovercomethelackofseparateFCsforthe
differentTUFs,SUCOMOintroducedcorecommittee
system 4 years ago into TUFs. For example anti
displacement front had a core committee with a
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
522 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

party members (Organizers)from6Statesinitially.

Aftergoodworkinthebeginningthememberfrom
Chh was withdrawn,membersfromJHandOrissa
werearrestedseveraltimes. Anothermemberfrom
WBwasalsoarrestedrecently. ExceptinJH,there
werenoreplacementsandhencethecoordinationof
the TUF work on antidisplacement suffered. As
there was always a replacement from JH or the
arrestedComradegotreleasedandcamebacktothe
core,antidisplacementworkdevelopedtoanextent
andagoodnumberofmassprogrammeshavebeen
conductedthere.

SUCOMO also planned for a core committee

fortheTUFonPoliticalPrisoners.Butbeforeitcould
be informed to all state, the CC incharges were
arrestedoneaftertheotherandSUCOMO'sguidance
stoppedcomingtotheFC. Therefore,theproposed
core committee could never take shape till today.
The work suffered as only one Comrade who is
taking sole responsibility could not cope up with
enormous work. Only in four States units were
formed as the lone comrade could get contacts in
thosefourstatesandformedstatelevelunits. This
comrade has been moving across the states do his
bestworkpossibleonpoliticalprisoners. Thisalso
meansallcategoriesofpoliticalprisoners.Butheis
helpedbynonpartyforcesinaclosecoordination.
Wherestatecommitteeswereformedlocalcomrades
aredoinggoodworkparticularlyinthesefourstates
and most of the arrested comrades in those states
were attended to. These units also look after
neighbouringstates,playedcentralrolesinreleasing
as many comrades, apart from taking up good
campaign.

(3) Inparano.9ofthisdocumentitismentioned
that This front get a boost if our FC member is
released. The Comrade who is now working will
have a great advantagewiththatcomrade. These
writers and artists made possible the campaign
against death penalty given to our member. His
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
523 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

songs and writings were used in that campaign.

Comrade Vivek continuously mobilised the writers
andartistsinthewaragainstPeopleCampaign,in
the campaign against death penalty given to our
comrade and life sentence given to our comrades
SeemaandViswavijay.

The responsibilities of FC allotted to Jaddu and

ChetanintheFCmeetingareasfollows:
The responsibilitiesofJaddu :Incharge ofworkers
organization.JanPratirodhandinchargeofthestate
UnitsofBihar,PunjabandUttarakhand.Looksafter
partycellsamongtheworkers'unionafterthelocal
partybecamedefunct.

TheresponsibilitiesofChetan :TUFonWaragainst
People, International work, People's Resistance,
InchargeofStateUnitsofWestBengal,Keralaand
Delhiandresponsiblefortakingupeffortstoform
A3inTamilNadu.

634] OnperusalofArticleNo.A21ofExh.266seizedfromthe
possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra, the word Chetan is
mentionedinreferencetoaccusedno.6Saibabaandthedutieswhich
aregiventoChetanrelatestoaccusedno.6Saibabaandatthelast
paraofpageno.2ofthisdocumenttheproblemandweaknessesofFC
weregivenandthisFChasreferencetothedocumentatpageno.29
of Exh.267 at point no.9 where the functioning of FC has been
describedandinparano.2theword,antidisplacementwasusedin
relates to Chetan and in respect of work of Jaddu he has been
assignedtheworkofJanPratirodhmagazinewhichisseizedfrom
thehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba. P.W.6AtulAvhadinhis
crossexamination admitted the suggestion of the defence that in
maoistgroupeverymemberhasaliasnameandnormallytheyuse
alias name. Here the name 'Chetan' has reference with accused
Saibaba.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
524 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

635] OnperusalofArt.A21ofExh.266itrevealsinparano.1
thatoneofthememberofFCisfacingdeathpenaltyandinsecond
paragraphofthesaiddocumentitismentionedthatforthelastthree
yearstheFCofA3isfunctioningwithoutanyguidancefromtheCC
orSUCOMOandthepersonreferredinparano.1isJitenMurandi
and this fact is also corroborated from videoclip found in video
having path Exh.3/Meetings/Jiten Convention Against Death
Penalty/20 Dec 2011 Jiten Convention 2 Compressed version/
convention disc 2/VTS_01 _5, seized from the house search of
accusedno.6Saibabawhereinaccusedno.4PrashantRahiwasseen
attending the said programme and there is another videoclip
regardingthedeathpenaltyofJitenMurandiwhichisfoundinthe
harddisc at Ex.3 having path Exh.3/films/s1/Jeetan
1/video_TS/VTS_01_1,whichwasseizedfromthehouseofaccused
no.6 Saibaba under panchanama Exh.165 and on seeing video it
appears that accused no.4 Prashant Rahi was seen on the dais
alongwithfourpersonsinwhichoneladybelowherimagethename
Aparna, wifeof Jeetanis writtenandsheisaddressing,belowthe
bannerofJanConventionandshehasstatedthatJeetanwasmaking
documentaryattherelevanttime.

636] Further, from the document titled as Resolution of CF
meetingon07.06.2013atArt.130Aitrevealsthatthereisresolution
toformcommitteeforreleaseofpoliticalprisonersinwhichthename
ofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiisappearingandinthesaiddocument
itwasagreedthataccusedno.4PrashantRahishouldbegivenone
bookstallatDelhitofacilitatepropermaintenance,distributionand
circulatethebooksandeventhoughhewilltakethisresponsibility
independentlyanditwouldbebetterifthisisdoneincoordination
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
525 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

withtheCFcomradesandthereareseveralphotographsofaccused
no.4PrashantRahiwhichwerefoundintheharddiscseizedfromthe
house search of accused no.6 Saibaba while attending meetings,
addressing gatherings and to that effect Question nos.131 to 136
wereputtoaccusedno.4PrashantRahiinhisstatementu/s313of
Cr.PC.whichshowsthatheisincontactwithaccusedno.6Saibaba.

637] Further,onviewingphotographsfoundinharddisc(Ex.3)
seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabahavingpath
Exh.3/new folder(2)/Allmetters1/photos/A.P.RDFconvention/
photosno.DSC_0913,inwhichaccusedno.4PrashantRahiwasseen
onthestagewithbanneronbackgroundofRDFandwasstanding
holdingbookinhishandandinthebacksideaccusedno.6Saibaba
wasfoundseatingonthedaisalongwithothers,andinthevideoclip
foundinharddisc(Ex.3)seizedfromhousesearchofaccusedno.6
Saibaba having path Exh.3/films/s1/RDF/1/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2,
itisseenthat thedignitariesfromdifferentpartsincludingaccused
no.6G.N.Saibaba,Dy.Secretary,RDFandaccusedno.4PrashantRahi
werecalledondaisascomradebelowthebannerofRDFonthedais.

638] Besidestheseeightdocuments,fromthepersonalsearch
ofaccusedno.4PrashantRahifollowingarticleswereseized
i] DainkBhaskarnewspaper
ii] OnepacketcontainingcashRs.8819/,
iii] Pancard
iv] Yatricard
v] Drivinglicenseofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi
vi] Onetransparentplasticfilecontainingthe
documentanewspublishedinDainikBhaskar
newspaperinrespectofNarayanSanyal(AMaoist)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
526 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

639] On perusal of document at page no.90 of Exh.267 it

revealsthatthereisusualpracticeofnaxalshavingpath Exh.4/All
Sai/for study/latest/Vanja's Articles taken out from the harddisc
(Ex.4) of accused no.6 Saibaba titled as I am convinced the
Naxalites(Maoists)havealotofsupportinwhichitismentioned
thatanewspaperandbananashelpedlinkupwithMaoistsandthe
CommunistPartyofIndiaMaoist(CPIMaoist).Fromthisdocument
itrevealsthatinordertoidentifythemembersofCPIMaoistorRDF
organisation by unknown person the unique identification i.e.
Banana,Umbrellaandnewspaperwereused.

640] Hence, in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case

finding of daily newspaper Dainik Bhaskar can be considered as
incriminatingevidenceagainstaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.

641] Asdiscussedearlierthequestionsrelatingtoincriminating
evidencefoundagainstaccusedno.4PrashantRahiin16GBmemory
cardandelectronicgadgetsArts.1to41intheformtext,photographs
andvideowereputtoaccusedno.4PrashantRahiinhisstatement
u/s313Cr.P.C.andinviewofJudgmentofApexCourtinAnvarP.V.
v.P.K.Basheer[(2014)10SCC
473]:(AIR2015SC180) cited
suprathisisaprimaryevidence.Theincriminatingphotographsand
videoclipsandtextdocumentsrelatingtoaccusedno.4PrashantRahi
foundinthe16GBmemorycardofSandisccompanyseizedfromthe
possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra and electronic gadgets
Articles1to41likeCDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddiscsseizedfromthe
housesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaistobeconsideredinevidence.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
527 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Following are the incriminating photographs of accused no.4

PrashantRahifoundin electronicgadgetsArticles1to41like
CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddiscsseizedfromthehousesearchof
accusedno.6SaibabaunderseizurepanchanamaExh.165.

a] In the photograph found in harddisc having

path EXH5/C/allphotos/photossai/NewFolder
I,accusedno.4PrashantRahiisseenaddressinga
meeting of Revolutionary Democratic Front along
withaccusedno.6SaibabasupportedbyTelangana
PrajaFront.

b]Inthephotographfoundinharddischavingpath
EXH3/C/newfolder(2)/allmetters(I)/photos
/utt.rdf.accusedno.4PrashantRahiisseenalong
withdelegatesoftheRDFconferenceUttarakhand.

c] In the photograph found in harddisc having

pathEXH3/C/newfolder(2)/allmettersI/photos
utt. Rdf., convention Photos/rdf, accused no.4
Prashant Rahi is seen in convention of RDF
Uttarakhand.

d]Inthephotographfoundinharddischavingpath
EXH 5/C/all photos/photos sai/new folder1,
accusedno.4PrashantRahiis seen addressing a
meeting of Revolutionary Democratic Front
supportedbyTelanganaPrajaFront.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
528 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

e]Inthephotographfoundinharddischavingpath
EXH5Data/C/allphotos/photosSai/Newfolder
1,accusedno.4 Prashant Rahi was found
participating in a public meeting of Revolutionary
Democratic Front (Krantikari Janwadi Morcha)
along with coaccused no.3 Hem Mishra and no.6
Saibaba.

f]Inthephotographfoundinharddischavingpath
3/C/newfolder(2)/Allmetters1/Hemsphotos/
images,accusedno.4 Prashant Rahi is seen
alongwithaccusedno.3HemMishra.

g]Inthephotographfoundinharddischavingpath
Exh.3/newfolder(2)/24012012/Janpratirodh ,
inwhichaccusedno.4 Prashant Rahi was found
sittingingroupof1520peoplealongwithonelady.

h]Inthephotographfoundinharddischavingpath
Exh.3/new folder(2)/Allmetters1/photos/A.P.RDF
convention/photos no.DSC_0913, in which
accusedno.4Prashantwaspresenton the stage
havingbannerofRDFinthebacksideandaccused
no.4Prashantwasstandingholdingbookinhishand
and accusedno.6Saibabawasalsoseenonthedais
alongwithothers.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
529 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

I]Inthephotographatpageno.39takenoutfrom
theharddiscExh.5havingpath Exh.3/newfolder
(2)/all metters I/photos/utt.rdf.convention
photos.rdf, wife of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi
CharulataisseenaddressingtheconventionofRDF
Uttarakhand.

Following are the incriminating videoclips of accused no.4

PrashantRahifoundin electronicgadgetsArticles1to41like
CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddiscsseizedfromthehousesearchof
accusedno.6SaibabaunderseizurepanchanamaExh.165.

a] Inthevideoclipfoundinharddischavingpath
Exh.3/RDFconferencevideos/DVD_7/VIDEO_TS,
inwhichaccusedno.Prashantisseenattendingand
participatingintheconvention in the first RDF
conference held at Hyderabad in the year 2012
accused no.6 Saibaba was seen addressing the
peoplefromthestageandaccusedno.4Prashantis
seensittinginthehall having capacity around 500
people on the right side row and accused no.6
Saibabaisseenaddressingthemeeting.

b] In the video clip found in harddisc having

pathExh.3/films/s1/RDF/1/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2,
dignitaries from different parts including accused
no.6Saibaba,Dy.Secretary, RDFandaccused no.4
Prashant Rahi was called on dais as comrade
PrashantRahiandthereafterhewasseenbelowthe
bannerofRDFonthedaisalongwithothers.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
530 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

c] Inthevideoclipfoundinharddischavingpath
Exh.3/films/s1/Jeetan1/video_TS/VTS_01_1,
accused no.4PrashantRahi wasseenonthedais
alongwithfourpersonsin which one lady by
nameAparna,wifeofJeetanisaddressing, below
the banner of Jan Convention and she has stated
that Jeetan was making documentary at the
relevant time.

d] In the video clip having path Exh.3/films/s1

/RDF/2/VIDEO _TS/ VTS_01_1, accused no.6
Saibaba is seen on dais and accused no.4
Prashant Rahi is found sitting in the audience
whereone lady is shouting slogans demanding
returnofArmyfrom Kashmirandforliberationof
Kashmirandaccusedno.4 Prashant Rahi is
respondingtotheslogans.

Followingdocumentsshowingtheactivitiesofaccusedno.4
PrashantRahiwerefoundintheharddiscseizedinthehouse
search of accused no.6 Saibaba under seizure panchanama
Exh.165:

a] In the letter taken out from the harddisc

Exh.4 at Art.162 having path ex 4/8 Nov,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
531 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

2011/CRPP/CRPPOldFiles/ Brochure
final/More messages Political prisoners,
addressed to The Principal Secretary (Home)
UttarakhandGovernment Dehradon it is seen
thatitwassentbyaccusedno.4Prashant Rahi
belowthatMaoistPrisonersTamilNaduiswritten.

b] Inthedocumenttakenoutfromtheharddisc
Exh.4atArt.163havingpathex4/CRPP/CRPPOld
files/Brochure final/EDITED/ProfilePrashant
RahiEdited,titledas PrashantRahi withone
photograph stating therein that accused Prashant
RahiisaseniorjournalistofUttarakhandand it is a
document about his arrest by the State police on
15thDec2007inDeharadun.

642] In the statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C accused no.4 Prashant

Rahiexceptbaredenialhasnotgivenanyspecificexplanationabout
hisinvolvementintheprogrammesseeninthephotographs,video
clipsanddocuments.

643] TheCDRofmobileSIMcardno.8394875017showsthatit
belongstoaccusedno.4PrashantRahiandthecustomerapplication
formExh.335isprovedthroughtheevidenceofNodalOfficerP.W.16
RaviKhemrajPardesi. TheCDRofmobileSIMcardno.8800100490
shows that it belongs to accused no.6 Saibaba and accused no.6
SaibabaadmittedtheevidenceregardingcalldetailsofmobileSIM
cardno.8800100490atExh.413filedonrecord.NodalOfficerP.W.22
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
532 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ManojPatilhasstatedinhisexaminationaboutthefactthatmobile
SIMcardno.8800100490isbelongingtoaccusedno.6Saibabaand
hehasfiledcalldetailsofthesameatExh.413. Onperusalofcall
details it reveals that accused no.6 Saibaba made phone calls to
accused no.4 Prashant Rahi on 6.9.2012, 19.5.2013, 21.5.2013,
3.6.2013, 4.6.2013, 4.7.2013, 5.7.2013, 8.7.2013, 9.7.2013,
30.7.2013, 31.7.2013 and 14.8.2013. Further the call details at
Exh.413 shows that accused no.4 Prashant Rahi made phone calls
from his mobile no.8394875017 to the mobile no.8800100490
belongingtoaccusedno.6Saibabaon13.9.2012,4.7.2013,5.7.2013
and14.8.2013.However,accusedno.4PrashantRahideniedthathe
hashavinganyconnectionwithaccusedno.6Saibaba.

644] Thechargesheetwasfiledagainstaccusedno.4Prashant
Rahi at Uttarakhand of Nanakmatta Police Station, District :
Udhamsing Nagar in Crime no.134/07 for the offences punishable
underSections121,121A,124A,153B,120BoftheIPCandunder
Section20ofUAPA.ItisatExh.264. Fromtheaboveincriminating
evidence which is proved beyond all reasonable doubt by the
prosecution it is clear that accused no.4 Prashant Rahi is active
member of RDF organisation, a frontal organisation of banned
organisationCPI(Maoist)andhewasfoundinpossessionofcertain
papersincludingeightprintedpagesalongwithtypewrittenpapersof
undertrialprisonerMaoistleaderNarayanSanyal(Articleno.130A)
containing incriminating material in respect of activities of CPI
(Maoist)bannedorganisationanditsfrontalorganizationRDF.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
533 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

645] From the oral and documentary evidence, photographs,

videoclips found in electronic gadgets (Arts.1 to 41) and 16 GB
memorycard it is clear that accused no.4 Prashant Rahi is active
member of RDF, a frontal organization of CPI (Maoist) banned
organization and he was communicating with people and he was
incitingandinstigatingthepeopleforviolenceandhisinvolvementis
establishedthatheisamemberofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)
anditsfrontalorganisationRDF.

SubmissionofLd.Spl.P.P.foraccusedno.5Vijay

646] Inrespectofaccusedno.5VijayTirki,learnedSpl.P.P.Shri
Sathianathan submitted that accused no.5 Vijay Tirki alongwith
accusedno.4PrashantRathiwasarrestedon2.9.2013atChichgadT
pointandthenbroughttoPoliceStation,Aheri. Fromhispersonal
search mobile handset of Intex company and the articles like
newspapermatchingwiththestandardcodeofnaxalsandmembers
ofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontorganisationRDF
were seized under seizure panchanama and he had not given any
satisfactoryexplanationforthesame.

SubmissionofAdvocateShriSamaddarforaccusedno.5Vijay
Tirki

647] The learned Advocate Shri Samaddar for accused no. 5

VijayTirkisubmittedthatprosecutionexamined4witnessesi.e.P.W.3
UmajiChandankhede,P.W.8RameshYede,P.W.11SuhasBawcheand
P.W.14RajendrakumarTiwari. HesubmittedthataccordingtoP.W.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
534 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

14RajendrakumarTiwari,hecametoknowthatthepersontowhom
theyweresearchinghadgonetowardsDevari andthereafter,they
had gone towards Devari and at Chichgad T point, he arrested
accusedno.5VijayTirkialongwithaccusedno.4PrashantRahiand
after arrest of accused persons,he proceeded towardsAheri from
Devri. He further submitted that this witness has admitted in his
crossexamination that at ChichgadTpoint,there are Tstalls,pan
shopsaresituatedandhedidnotmakeanyarrestpanchanamawhen
theaccusedwerearrestedandhehasnotgivenanyexplanationasto
whypanchanamawasnotpreparedatthespotandastowhythe
personalsearchofbothaccusedwasnotcarriedout. Hesubmitted
thatthereisnomentionofseizure ofanyincriminatingarticlesin
panchnamaatExh.180 foundinpossessionofaccusedno.5Vijay
Tirki.

648] HesubmittedthataccordingtoP.W.8RameshYede,they
tookthosetwopersonstoAheriPoliceStationandtheyreachedto
Aherionthenextdaymorningandhandedoverthosetwopersonsto
investigatingofficerP.W.11SuhasBawche.Hefurthersubmittedthat
accordingtoinvestigatingofficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheon292013
accused no. 4 Prashant Rahi and accused no. 5 Vijay Tirki were
broughtbyAPITiwari(P.W.14)andhisstafftoAheriPoliceStation
fromPoliceStationChichgadandthenpersonalsearchofaccusedno.
5VijayTirkiwastakenandpanchnamaExh.180wasprepared.He
submittedthatonperusalofExh.180itshowsthatthereismention
oftimeofpreparationofpanchnamaas630to645of292013and
according to the time mentioned in all documents the time of 24
hoursweretaken. Thisshowsthatitwasmorningtimeandhence,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
535 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

noneofthewitnesscanbebelievedonthepointofarrestofaccused
no.5andseizureofanyarticlesfromhispossessionandthereisno
further investigation after arrest of the accused by investigating
officertoconnectthepresentaccusedwiththecrime.ButProsecution
witness Umaji in his crossexamination admitted that panchanama
was made in the evening at 5.00 p.m., this show that there are
discrepancies in the evidence of prosecution witness and hence
evidence can not be relied upon and he prayed for acquittal of
accusedno.5VijayTirki. Insupportofhissubmissionheplaced
reliance on the judgment of Ramu v State of Maharashtra
reportedin2011(1)Mh.L.J.(Cri.)1461whereinitisheldthat

PenalCode,SS.328and379Appellantconvicted
and sentenced for administering intoxicating
substancetothecomplainantandcommittingtheft
Appeal There was material variance in the
testimony of complainant and the other Pws on
important aspects of the incident There were
infirmities and deformities in the search of the
appellant and the seizure of the articles from the
appellantTherewasunexplaineddelayinsending
theseize3darticlesforCAPossibilityoftampering
ofthearticlescouldnotberuledoutTestimonies
of PW 5 and 6 were not related to the alleged
incident Prosecution case did not inspire
confidence Conviction and sentence of the
appellantwaserroneousandunsustainableAppeal
allowed.(Paras28and30to33)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
536 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Conclusionforaccusedno.5Vijay

649] According to the prosecution from the possession of

accusedno.5VijayTirkiadailynewspaperDainikBhaskar,fourpieces
ofpapersonwhichsomephonenumberswerewrittenandmobile
handsetwereseizedandcashamountofRs.5000/.

650] ThelearnedAdvocateShriGadlingandP.C.Samaddarfor
the accused submitted that there are discrepancies of making
panchanama in respect of arrest of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi.
Panchanama Exh.179 shows that it was prepared at 5.45 a.m.,
however, panch witness P.W.3 Umaji Chandankhede in his
examination stated that panchanama was prepared in the evening
time.ItistobenotedthatpanchwitnessP.W.3UmajiChandankhede
isanilliteratepersonandthepanchanamainquestionwasprepared
on2.9.2013andthewitnesshasdeposedafteraperiodofthreeyears.
Hence,merelybecausediscrepanciesabouttimeasstatedbypanch
witnessP.W.3UmajiChandankhedeitcannotbeconsidered.Hemight
have stated so because of loss of memory but his stray admission
cannot be considered as fatal to the prosecution because other
evidence i.e. RailwayTicket from Delhi to Raipur, finding of
identification code, personal documents of accused no.4 Prashant
RahishowsthathewasproceedingfromDelhitoRaipurandfinding
ofNewspaperDainikBhaskarwithaccusedno.5VijayTirkiofsame
dateshowsthathehadbeentoChichgadTpointtoreceiveaccused
no.4PrashantRahitohavemeetingwithundergroundnaxalRamdar.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
537 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

651] FurtherthereisanentrymadebyP.W.14Rajendrakumar
TiwariinstationdiaryofPoliceStation,Devriaboutproceedingto
Aheri andentry tothateffectwastaken inPoliceStation Devriat
Exh.241andafterreachingatAheriPoliceStationinearlymorning
and they handedover custody of accused no.4 Prashant and no.5
VijaytoP.W.11SuhasBawcheandstationdiaryentrytothateffect
was taken vide Serial no.6/2013dated2.9.2013atExh.275Cand
time is mentioned in the station diary is 5.00 a.m. and thereafter
InvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawchepreparedpanchanamain
presenceofpanchasvideExh.179and180atabout6.15a.m.After
preparationofpanchanamaonthesamedayhedepositedthesaid
articlesseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiand
accusedno.5VijayTirkiwithwitnessGaneshRathod,theMuddemal
Clerkonthesameday.Atthisstageitisnecessarytoconsiderthe
ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the judgment of Bharwada
Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v State of Gujrat reported in AIR 1983
SupremeCourt753whereinitisobservedthat
(B) Evidence Act (1 of 1872, S.3 Evidence
Appreciation of Discrepancies Overmuch
importancecannotbegiventominordiscrepancies.

Overmuch importance cannot be given to minor

discrepancies.Discrepancieswhichdonotgotothe
rootofthematterandshakethebasicversionofthe
witnesses,therefore,cannotbeannexedwithundue
importance. More so when the all important
probabilitiesfactorechoesinfavouroftheversion
narratedbythewitnesses.

652] Even otherwise if it is taken that panch witness P.W.3

Umaji Chandankhede has made false statement the principle of
falsus in uno falsus in omnibus is not applicable in India as
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
538 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

observedbytheTheApexCourtinthecaseofGunnanaPentayya
vs.StateofA.P.Reportedin2008BHCCO1910inCriminalAppeal
No.292 of 2006, decided on 20th August, 2008, in para 15
observedthat
E. Maxim falsus in uno falsus in
omnibus IthasnoapplicationinIndiaEvenif
major portion of evidence found to be deficient,
residueiffoundsufficienttoproveguilt,conviction
canbesustained.

653] From the above discussion of evidence of prosecution

witnessesonthepointofarrestofaccusedno.4Prashantandno.5
VijayatChichgadTpointfollowingcircumstanceshavebeenproved
beyondreasonabledoubts.
1] On 1.9.2013 P.W.8 Ramesh Yede and P.W.14
RajendrakumarTiwariwereonpetrollingdutyintheforestareaof
ChhattisgarhandborderofMaharashtra.Theyreceivedmessageon
their mobile phone that accused in C.R.no.3017/2013 of Police
Station,AheriwereinRaipurareaandtheywereproceedingtowards
DevrifromRaipur.
2] Thereafter P.W.8 Ramesh and P.W.14 Rajendrakumar
proceeded towards Devri by four wheeler and when they reached
theretheycametoknowthatwantedaccusedinC.R.no.3017/2013
proceeded towards Chichgad Tpoint. Thereafter they went to
Chichgad Tpoint where they found two persons i.e. accused no.4
Prashant and no.5 Vijay in suspicious circumstances and their
descriptionwassameasgiventothembyAheriPoliceStation.
3] P.W.8RameshandP.W.14Rajendrakumararrestedaccusedno.4
Prashantandno.5Vijayandtheyfoundinpossessionofaccusedno.4
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
539 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Prashantpapersrelatingtonaxalliterature.Hence,theytookthemto
Chichgad Police Station and made station diary entry in Chichgad
PoliceStationatExh.275Cwhichisfiledonrecordonwhichtimeis
mentionedas5.00p.m.andthereaftertheyproceededtoAheri. To
thateffectletterisfiledonrecordatExh.241.
4] They reached to Aheri Police Station by four wheeler vehicle
earlymorningon02092013andtheyhandedoverthecustodyof
accusedno.4Prashantandno.5VijaytoP.W.11SuhasBawche.
5] The evidence of P.W.11 Suhas Bawche shows that he took
personalsearchof accusedno.4Prashantandno.5Vijayandfrom
possession of accused no.4 Prashant eight papers relating to naxal
literature, typewritten document, Dainik Bhaskar dated 1.9.2013,
YatricardfromDelhitoRaipurandotherarticleswereseizedunder
thepanchanamaExh.179andfrompossessionofaccusedno.5Vijay
TirkiDainikBhaskardated1.9.2013andotherarticleswereseized
under the panchanama Exh.180 and the time mentioned in
panchanama Exh.179 is 6.15 a.m. and the time mentioned in
panchanamaExh.180is6.30a.m.
6] The evidence of P.W.11 Suhas Bawche and P.W.13 Ganesh
Rathodshowsthaton2.9.2013P.W.11Suhasdepositedarticlesseized
fromaccusedno.4and5intheMalkhanaofAheriP.S.Tothateffect
entryisatExh.276B. Inviewofaboveunimpeachableevidenceon
record a stray admission given by panch witness P.W.3 Umaji that
panchanamawaspreparedineveningtimecannotbeconsidered.

654] ThelearnedAdvocateShriGadlingandSamaddarfurther

arguedthatpanchanama(Exh.179)wasnotpreparedonthespotat

ChichgadTpoint. Butitistobenotedthatastheoffenceagainst
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
540 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accusedisunderUAPAandinvestigationistobecarriedoutbySDPO,

hence as per direction of SDPO Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas

BawchereceivedontelephonetheP.W.14RajendrakumarTiwaritook

accused no.4 Prashant Rahi and accused no.5 Vijay Tirki to Aheri.

Hence, nondrawing of panchanama at Chichgad Tpoint regarding

arrestofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiandaccusedno.5VijayTirkion

thespotisnotfataltotheprosecution.Theprosecutionhasproved

beyondreasonabledoubtthataccusedno.4Prashantandno.5Vijay

werearrestedon1.9.2013ineveningandtheywereproducedbefore

P.W.11SuhasSDPOAherion2.9.2013at6.15a.m.andincriminating

articles were seized from their possession under the panchanama

Exh.179and180. Hence,thecaselawcitedby learnedAdvocate

Shri Gadling on behalf of accused no.1 to 4 and 6 in the case of

Pradeep Narayan Madgaonkar & ors vs State of Maharashtra

1995 SCC (Cri)708 cited supra and case law cited by learned

AdvocateShriSamaddaronbehalfofaccusedno.5VijayTirkiinthe

case of Ramu v State of Maharashtra reported in 2011 (1)

Mh.L.J.(Cri.)1461 citedsupraisnotapplicabletothefactsofthe

present case and the prosecution has proved that accused no.4

Prashantandno.5VijaywerearrestedatDevriChichgadTpointand

theywereproducedbeforeAheriP.S.atabout6.15a.m.andfrom

theirpossessionincriminatingarticlesasdiscussedabovewereseized

underseizurepanchanamaExh.179and180.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
541 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

SANCTION

655] Nowitisnecessarytoseewhetherthesanctioninrespect
ofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNarote,no.3HemMishra,
no.4PrashantRahiandno.5VijayTirkiinSessionscaseno.13/2014
isvalidlyaccorded.

EVIDENCE

656] To prove grant of sanction for offences under UAPA in

respect of accused nos.1 to 5 in Sessions Case No.13/2014, the
prosecutionhasreliedontheevidenceof

i) InvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche(P.W.11)atExh.235;and
ii) SanctioningAuthorityAmitabhRajan(P.W.19)atExh.355

657] InthisrespectInvestigatingOfficerSuhasBawche(P.W.11)
in his examination stated that on 122014 he issued letter for
obtainingsanctiontoprosecutetheaccusedinCrimeNo.3017/2013
under UAPA. The said letter is at Exh.265. The proposal was
submitted to Addl.S.P. Aheriand throughhim,it wassubmittedto
Government, Home Department, State of Maharashtra and he
suppliedallcopiesofchargesheetalongwiththesaidproposal.On
1522014hereceivedsanctionorderbyFaxfromHomeDepartment,
Mantralaya and after receiving the sanction order alongwith all
papers,hefiledchargesheetagainstaccusedno.1to5inthecourtof
JMFCAheri.Hereceivedoriginalcopyofthesanctionorderdated15
22014on2422014andsubmittedinthecourton2622014.The
saidSanctionorderisatExh.17.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
542 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

658] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counselonthispointofsanction.Incrossexaminationheadmitted
that there is no letter on record requesting sanction under his
signatureandpermissionwassoughtbyShrirame.

659] P.W.19 Dr.Amitabh Rajan is Additional Chief Secretary

(Home), State of Maharashtra and Sanctioning Authority who
grantedsanctioninSessionCaseno.13/2014.Inhisexaminationhe
hasstatedthathisofficereceivedtheproposalfromAdditionalD.G.
incharge of Special Operation Maharashtra Police Directorate in
relationtothiscrimeon7th February,2014andonthesamedayhe
sent it to Director of Public Prosecutor, Maharashtra State for
independentassessmentandopinionvideletteratExh.356andafter
getting the independent review from incharge Directorate of
Prosecution at Exh.358, he received the file on 1422014 for
accordingsanctionalongwithallinvestigationpapers,chargesheet,
calenderofeventsandopinionofDirectorofPublicProsecutorand
around257pages.

660] Hetookthesaidfiletohishomeforstudyandreadthe
same up to 1422014 and after going through all investigation
papers, particularly CFSL report, soft copies of the electronic data,
hard copies of mirror images containing in the electronic gadgets
Article1to41,hecametotheconclusionthattherewasconspiracy
between accused no. 1 to 6 (Mahesh Tirki, Pandu Narote, Hem
Mishra,PrashantRahi,VijayTirkiandG.N.Saibaba)bymeetingof
mind and they concealed their identity and he considered the
confessionalstatementsofAtramandtheseizureofarticles,16GB
memorycard,whichwasseizedfromaccusedno.3HemMishraand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
543 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accorded sanction against accused no.1 to 5 (Mahesh Tirki, Pandu

Narote,HemMishra,PrashantRahiandVijayTirki)u/s13,18,20,
38,39ofUAPAandasaccusedno.6Saibabawasnotarrestedbythat
time, sanction was not accorded against him. Thereafter, he
recommendedthesanctionandfilewassubmittedtotheMinisterof
HomeforapprovalofthefileandafterreceiptofthefilefromHome
Minister,heissuedSanctionOrderatExh.17.

661] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel. Inhiscrossexaminationhestatedthathedidnotseeany
notes,buthehadgonethroughthesanctionorderfromtheofficeof
Ravindra Kadam, Inspector General of Police, Nagpur Range. He
statedthatitisnotreflectedinanydocumentonrecordtoshowthat
the documents at Exh. 356, 357, 358, Exh. 17 and Exh. 16 were
producedbeforehimbyDIGMr.RavindraKadam.Headmittedthat
itisnotmentionedinExh.17thathereceivedtherecommendation
fromDirectorofPublicProsecutionandthereisnomentionthaton
1322014filewassubmittedtoSectionOfficer,DeputySecretaryLaw
andSecretary(Special),HomeDepartmentandthereafteron142
2014 he received the file for according sanction alongwith all
investigation papers, calender of events and opinion of Director of
PublicProsecutionandaround257pages.Headmittedthatitisnot
mentionedinExh.17thathetookthesaidfileathishomeandhe
readthefileintheearlymorningandintheafternoonsessionon14
22014. Headmittedthaton1522014at200p.m.thefilewas
senttoHomeMinisteranditcamefromMinisterat1130p.m. to
himinonesealedcoverbyonepersonfromMinisterandShriR.R.
Patil,thethenHomeMinister,ofMaharashtraGovernmenthadsent
thefiletohimandthesaidapprovalisstillinthefilepertainstothe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
544 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Sanction (Exh.17) and it is not mentioned in the sanction order

Exh.17 that they had ever received the approval from the Cabinet
Minister. Witnessvoluntarilysaidthatitisonlysignedbyhim.He
admittedthatthenhewenttotheofficeandsignedthesanctionorder
onbehalfoftheStateGovernmentbefore1200p.m.inthenight.

662] Headmittedthathehadgonethroughthestatementof
accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotebeforeaccording
sanctionwhichwastakenbeforeMagistrateanditisapartofthe
recordthathecametotheconclusionthaton2282013accusedno.
1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotehadbeentoBallarshaRailway
Stationandhecannotrememberwhetheritwasinthestatementof
anywitness.Headmittedthatconsideringthevoluminousrecord,he
cannotsaythatitisapartofstatementofanywitnessandhecould
notpointoutthestatementandaccordingtohimitispartofthecase
diaryandhefurtheradmittedthathecannotsaywhetherhecameto
theconclusionfromstatementofanywitnesstoshowthataccused
no.4 Prashant Rahi was the member of CPI Maoist. Witness
voluntarilystatedthathewouldconfirmthisfactfromtherecordof
the case and he cannot say from which record he came to such
conclusion.Headmittedthathecametoconclusionthatmicrochip
was handed over to accused no.3 Hem Mishra by accused no.6
Saibabafromcallrecordsandthereisnostatementonrecordtoshow
that accused no. 6 Saibaba had ever handed over microchip to
accusedno.3HemMishra,however,witnessvoluntarilystatedthathe
cametotheconclusionfromcallrecordandCFSLreportregarding16
GBmemorycardandmirrorimagesofelectronicrecordseizedfrom
accused no.6 Saibaba. He admitted that there is nostatement on
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
545 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

recordtoshowthataccusedno.6Saibabahaddirectedaccusedno.3
HemMishratogotoBallarsha,however,witnessvoluntarilystated
that he came to the conclusion from call record and CFSL report
regardingto16GBmemorycard andmirrorimagesofelectronic
recordseizedfromaccusedno.6Saibaba.Headmittedthatthereisno
statementonrecordtoshowthataccusedno.6SaibabagaveMaoist
documents to accused no. 4 Prashant Rahi to be delivered to the
underground cadres of CPI Maoist in Abujamad forest, however,
witnessvoluntarilystatedthathecametotheconclusionfromcall
recordandCFSLreportregardingto16GBmemorycardandmirror
imagesofelectronicrecordseizedfromaccusedno.6Saibaba.

663] He denied that he did not go through the process of

accordingsanctionandhedidnotgothroughanymaterialanditis
typed order placed by the police authority and he merely signed
withoutapplicationofmind.Hedeniedthathedeposedfalselythat
hereceivedsanctionorderfromMinisterandthereafterhesignedit.
Hedeniedthathehadaccordedsanctionwithoutapplicationofmind
andhisofficehadfabricatedthedocumentsExh.356,357,358,Exh.
17&Exh.16andpolicehadpreparedthesanctionorderandhehad
onlysignedonit.Hedeniedthattherewasnoroleofaccusedno.5
VijayTirkiinthepresentcase.

Sanction in respect of accused no.6 Saibaba in Sessions case

no.130/2015

664] To prove grant of sanction to prosecute accused no.6

SaibabaforoffencesunderUAPAinSessionsCaseno.130/2015,the
prosecutionhasreliedontheevidenceof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
546 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

i)P.W.23S.D.P.O.RameshDhumalatExh.414;and
ii) P.W.18 Sanctioning Authority Kalyaneshwar
BakshiatExh.345

665] P.W.23isRameshMalhariDhumalwhowasDy.S.P.Aheri,
in his evidence at Exh.414 has stated that he had received
investigationinthisCr.No.3017/2013on1662014andon322015
he sought sanction from the Home Department of State of
Maharashtraforprosecutingtheaccusedno.6G.N.Saibabathrough
S.P.Gadchiroli.HereceivedsanctionfromtheHomeDepartmentand
included the papers of sanction in the chargesheet and filed
supplementarychargesheetagainstaccusedG.N.Saibabaon3011
2015.

666] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythedefencecounsel
onthispoint.Inhiscrossexaminationhedeniedthathedidnotget
sanctionfromtheHomeDepartmentanddidnotfilesupplementary
chargesheetagainstG.N.Saibabaon30112015.

667] Shri Kalyaneshwar Bakshi (P.W. 18) is Additional Chief

Secretary, Home Department of State of Maharashtra in his
examinationatExh.345statedaboutprocedurefollowedbyhimfor
grantofsanctioninrespectofaccusedno.6SaibabainSessionsCase
no.130/2015.Hestatedthatfrom31 stDecember,2014tilldateofhis
evidence he has been working as the Additional Chief Secretary,
HomeDepartment,StateofMaharashtra,BombayandinCrimeno.
3017/2013ofPoliceStation,Aherihereceivedproposalforgrantof
sanctioninrespectofaccusedno.6Saibaba.Hestatedthatinitially
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
547 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

saidproposalwasreceivedtoDeputySecretaryofhisdepartmentand
thereaftersaidproposaldirectlycametohimforexaminationfrom
DeputySecretaryandon15.2.2015hisregistryreceivedproposaland
thereafter,on2622015hemarkedthesaidfiletoDirectorofPublic
Prosecutor,StateofMaharashtraforindependentreview.Thecopyof
theletterisatExh.346.

668] He stated that on 4th March, 2015 he received the

independent review from Director of Public Prosecutor along with
covering letter at Exh.347 and the review report at Exh.348 and
thereafter,heindependentlyreviewedtheproposalofsanction. He
stated that he had gone through all the documents i.e. search
warrant,investigationpapersalongwithchargesheet,CFSLreport,
hardcopiescertifiedbyCFSLBombay,allseizurepanchanamas,arrest
panchanamasofaccusedandallotherpapersofinvestigationwhich
weresubmittedtohimandthereafter,hehadgonethroughallthe
papersandtheindependentreviewopinionsubmittedbyDirectorof
PublicProsecutor, Bombay. Hestatedthathereadoverthemain
pagesofhardcopiescontaining247pagesandaftergoingthrough
documents,hesubjectivelysatisfiedthattherewasprimafaciecase
againstaccusedno.6Saibabaforoffencepunishableu/s13,18,20,
38and39oftheUAPAct1967.Hence,hepassedsanctionorderat
Exh.349forprosecutionagainstaccusedno.6Saibaba.

669] Thiswitnesswascrossexaminedbythelearneddefence
counsel. In crossexamination he admitted that the number NAX
0214/CR37isanumberoffilerelatedtothesanctionorderExh.349
whichwassoughtbySDPORameshDhumal(P.W.23)on3.2.2015.
Headmittedthathehadnotmentionedthereferenceofanyletter
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
548 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

received from SDPO Aheri or S.P., Gadchiroli for seeking sanction

(Exh.349).HedidnotrecollectwhetherhehadreceivedStatement
ofAccusedu/s164ofCr.P.C.forgrantingsanction.Headmittedthat
ChapterIIIofUAPAdealswithactivitiesofunlawfulassociationand
after going through the notification he came to know that CPI
(Maoist)andtheirfrontalorganisationlikeRevolutionaryDemocratic
Front(RDF)aredeclaredasunlawfulassociation.Hestatedthathe
had gone throughallinvestigationpapersalongwithchargesheet,
CFSLreportandindependentreviewbyDirectorofPublicProsecutor.
HeadmittedthathehadtakenchargeofAdditionalChiefSecretary
Officeron31stDecember,2014andaccordedsanctionforthefirst
timeandhedoesnotrememberwhetherhehasgrantedanysanction
thereafterunderUAPA.

670] He admitted that in sanction order it is not mentioned

that he had referred investigation papers to Director of Public
Prosecutor,Bombayforreviewingtheaspectandhehadconsidered
his review report before according sanction. He admitted that he
came across with the statements of prosecution witnesses showing
thatattheinstanceofaccusedno.6Saibaba,accusednos.1Mahesh
andno.2PanduhadgonetoBallarshaon22.8.2013butsaidfactis
notreflectedinthestatementsofanywitnessanditisreflectedinthe
casediary.Headmittedthathewassuppliedcopyofsanctionorder
issuedbyAmitabhRajaninrespectofotheraccused.

671] Hedeniedthathedidnotreceiveanylettereitherfrom
SDPOAheriorfromS.P.,Gadchiroliforseekingsanctionandhedid
not receive any chargesheet or police papers before granting
sanction.Hedeniedthathedidnotgothroughthenotificationand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
549 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

without going through the provision of law he accorded sanction

againstaccusedno.6Saibaba. Hedeniedthathisdepartmentnever
addressedanylettertoDirectorofPublicProsecutorforreviewand
hedidnotreceiveanyreviewreportfromthemanditisnotreflected
insanctionorder(Exh.349). Hedeniedthathewasgivensanction
orderissuedbyAmitabhRajanandhence,bydeletingthenameof
otheraccusedheaddedthenameofSaibabaandpresentSanction
Orderisissuedmechanicallywithoutapplicationofmind.

672] Hedeniedthathedidnotreceiveproposalofsanctionin
respectofaccusedno.6G.N.Saibabaandthattheproposalfirstcame
to the Registration Department of Mantralaya, thereafter the said
proposalisforwardedtotheconcerneddeskandfromconcerneddesk
toDeputySecretaryandthereaftertheproposaldirectlycametohim
forexaminationfromDeputySecretaryandon1522015registrydid
notreceivetheproposalandon2622015hedidnotmarkthesaid
file to Director of Public Prosecutor for independent review. He
deniedthatasperhisoraldirectionhisofficehasnotforwardedthe
proposal to Director of Public Prosecutor for independent review
beforeplacingthesamebeforehim. Hedeniedthaton4 th March,
2015 he did not receive the independent review from Director of
PublicProsecutoralongwithcoveringletteraddressedtoJayantBhoir
andindependentreviewisfiledonrecordanditisdulyattestedby
him. He denied that all documents including search warrant,
investigation papers along with chargesheet, CFSL report, hard
copiesofcertifiedbyCFSLBombay,allseizurepanchanamas,arrest
panchanamasandallotherpaperswerenotsubmittedtohimandhe
didnotstudythefileandhedidnotgothroughallthedocuments.
Hedeniedthathedidnotgothroughtheindependentreviewgiven
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
550 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

byDirectorofPublicProsecutor,Bombayanddidnotreadoverthe
main pages of hard copies containing 247 pages and after going
throughdocuments,hedidnotsatisfythatthereisaprimafaciecase
againstaccusedfortheoffencepunishableu/s13,18,20,38&39of
theUAPAct1967andhedidnotcometotheconclusionthatitisafit
case to grant sanction for prosecution against accused no.6 G.N.
Saibabaandhedidnotpassthesanctionorderagainstaccusedno.6
G.N.Saibabaon6thApril,2015.

673] Learned defence counsel Shri Gadling had filed an

applicationatExh.466forcallingoforiginalrecordrelatingtogrant
of sanction in Sessions case no.13/2014 and Sessions case
no.130/2015.Thesaidapplicationwasallowedandprosecutionwas
directedtoproduceoriginalpapersrelatingtograntofsanctionin
Sessions case no.13/2014 and Sessions case no.130/2015. In
pursuanceofsaidorderprosecutionhasproducedonrecordoriginal
papersrelatingtograntofsanctioninSessionscaseno.13/2014and
Sessions case no.130/2015. The said original files are filed along
withlistofdocumentsatExh.474.Theoriginalfilerelatingtogrant
ofsanctioninrespectofSessionsCaseNo.13/2014againstaccused
no.1to5contains1189pages.Theoriginalfileforgrantofsanction
in respect of Sessions Case No.130/2015 against accused no.6
Saibabacontains377pages.

ArgumentofSpl.P.P.ShriSathianathanonSanction

674] LearnedSpecialP.P.ShriSathianathansubmittedthatthe
sanction was validly accorded in respect of accused no.1 to 5 in
SessionsCaseno.13/2014andinrespectofaccusedno.6Saibabain
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
551 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Sessions Case no.130/2015. He submitted that the provisions of

Section13,18,20,38,39ofUAPAreadwithSection120BofIPCare
primafacieattractedagainstaccusednos.1to6anditisclearfrom
thedatacontainedintext,videoclipsandphotographsinelectronic
gadgets (Article 1 to 41) i.e. CDs, DVDs, pendrives, harddiscs,
memorycardseizedfromhousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaunder
seizurepanchanamaatExh.165and16GBmemorycardseizedfrom
the personal search of accused no.3 Hem Mishra under seizure
panchanamaatExh.137(Art.A17toA21).Thedatacontainedin
text form is relating to writings, letters addressed to Comrades,
Secretary report, reports regarding meetings in respect of
Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF), a frontal organisation of
bannedorganisationCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)andthesaid
datacontainedintext,audio,videoformwasusedbyaccusednos.1
to 6 for circulation to the underground naxal in forest area of
Gadchiroli district for promoting and advocating the ideology of
bannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationfrom
RDFandtherebytocreateviolenceandincitementtothepeopleand
tocausepublicdisorder. Hesubmittedthatthisfactisalsoproved
from the evidence of Raju Atram (P.W.9) and further from
confessional statements of accused no.1 Mahesh and no.2 Pandu
whichisrecordedbyJMFC,Aheri,NileshwarVyas(P.W.12).

675] He submitted that the mirror copies of electronic data

retrievedfromelectronicgadgetsseizedfromthepersonalsearchof
accusedno.3HemMishraandfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
Saibabaintheformofaudio,videoandtextweresenttosanctioning
authority by the Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche. P.W.18
Kalyaneshwar Bakshi and P.W.19 Dr.Amitabh Rajan in their
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
552 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

examination categorically stated that before grant of sanction they

had gone through all incriminating materials supplied to them i.e.
investigation papers, F.I.R., chargesheets, statement of witnesses,
panchnamas, confessional statements of accused no.1 Mahesh and
no.2 Pandu, soft copies of data contained in text form in 16 GB
memorycardatExh.266andthedatacontainedinPagenos.1to247
whichwascollectivelymarkedatExh.267andotherdocumentsand
thereaftertheycametotheconclusionthattherewasprimafaciecase
againstaccusednos.1to6fortheoffencepunishableunderSections
13,18,20,38,39ofUAPAreadwithSection120BoftheIPCand
sanctionatExh.17wasaccordedafterapplicationofmindinrespect
of accused no.1 to 5 in Sessions Case no.13/2014 and thereafter
sanction order (Exh.349) was accorded in respect of accused no.6
SaibabainSessionsCaseno.130/2015.

676] Spl.P.P. Shri Sathainathan submitted that in the present

case,twochargesheetshavefiledbytheprosecution. Investigating
Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche filed original chargesheet against
accusedno.1to5andthesessionscasewasregisteredasSessions
Case no.13/2014 and thereafter P.W.23 PSI Ramesh Dhumal filed
supplementary chargesheet against accused no.6 Saibaba and
SessionsCaseNo.130/2015wasregistered.Hesubmittedthatinthis
matterinitiallyFIRwaslodgedagainstaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,
no.2PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishraandduringinterrogation
withaccusedno.3HemMishrainvolvementofaccusedno.4Prashant
Rahiwasrevealedandaccusedno.4PrashantRahiwasarrestedalong
with accused no.5 Vijay Tirki and from interrogation with accused
no.3 Hem Mishra and accused no.4 Prashant Rahi involvement of
accusedno.6Saibabawasrevealedandhence,subsequentlyaccused
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
553 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

no.6Saibabawasarrested.Hefurthersubmittedthatasaccusedno.6
Saibabaisthinktankandhighprofileleaderofbannedorganisation
CPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDFhecouldnotbearrested
becauseofagitationmadebypeopleandthisfactisclearfromthe
evidenceofInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawche.Investigating
Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawchein hisexaminationclearlystatedthat
duringearlieroccasiontill26.2.2014theytriedtoarrestaccusedno.6
Saibaba and at that time, accused no.6 Saibaba called his party
membersandcreatedlawandorderproblemandhence,theycould
notarresthimearlier.

677] He submitted that Suhas Bawche (P.W.11) obtained the

arrest warrant of accused no.6 Saibaba from JMFC, Aheri on
26.2.2014 and then accused no.6 Saibaba came to be arrested by
P.W.11 Suhas Bawche after filing of the original chargesheet in
S.C.No.13/2014. He submitted that in Session case no.13/2014
proposal was sent by Suhas Bawche (P.W.11), SDPO, Aheri on
1.2.2014anditwasreceivedbyHomeDepartmenton7.2.2014and
tothateffectSuhasBawche(P.W.11)inhisexaminationdeposedthat
hehassentproposalthroughSuperintendentofPolice,Gadchirolion
1.2.2014. The said proposal was received by Home Department of
Maharashtraon7.2.2014andfurtherDr.AmitabhRajan(P.W.19)in
hisexaminationhasstatedthathisofficereceivedtheproposalfrom
Addl.D.G.i/cofspecialoperationMaharashtraPoliceDirectoratein
relationtograntofsanctionagainstaccusednos.1to5 in Sessions
Caseno.13/2014on7thFebruary,2014videletter(Exh.356)andon
thesamedayhesentittoDirectorofPublicProsecution,Maharashtra
Stateforindependentassessmentandopinionandon11.2.2014his
office received the independent review report (Exh.358) from I/c
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
554 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

DirectorofPublicProsecution,MaharashtraStatealongwithcovering
letter(Exh.357)andon15.2.2014sanction(Exh.17)wasaccordedto
prosecuteaccusednos.1to5inSessionsCaseno.13/2014.

678] Hesubmittedthatproposalforgrantofsanctioninrespect
ofaccusedno.6SaibabainSessionsCaseno.130/2015wassoughtby
RameshDhumal(P.W.23)on3.2.2015 anditwasreceivedbyHome
Departmenton15.2.2015andtothateffectRameshDhumal(P.W.23)
inhisexaminationdeposedthaton322015hesoughtsanctionfrom
HomeDepartmentofStateofMaharashtratoprosecutetheaccused
no.6G.N.Saibaba.Further,onthepointofaccordingofsanctionto
prosecuteaccusedno.6Saibaba,KalyaneshwarBakshi(P.W.18)inhis
examinationatExh.345statedthatinCrimeno.3017/2013ofPolice
Station,Aherihereceivedproposalforgrantofsanctioninrespectof
accusedno.6G.N.Saibabaandthereafter,on2622015hemarked
thesaidfiletoDirectorofPublicProsecutor,StateofMaharashtrafor
independentreviewvideletteratExh.346andon4 thMarch,2015he
receivedtheindependentreviewfromDirectorofPublicProsecutor
along with covering letter at Exh.347 and the review report at
Exh.348 and thereafter he independently reviewed the proposal of
sanction and after going through all the documents he accorded
sanction(Exh.349)andsentthesamevideletterExh.350.

679] Spl. P.P. Shri Sathianathan further submitted that on

perusalofproposalforsanctionthesanctioningauthorityfoundthat
therewasprimfaciecaseagainstaccusednos.1to6andthisfactis
crystalclearfromthescheduleExh.17annexedtoSanctionOrderand
inthescheduleitisclearlymentionedthattherewasprimafaciecase
againstaccusednos.1to6butbecauseofthefactthataccusedno.6
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
555 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Saibabawasnotarrestedthesanctionwasnotgrantedbythattime.
However,onperusalofsaidScheduleitrevealsthatprimafaciecase
wasfoundagainstaccusedno.1to6forgrantofsanctionanditwas
never intention of the Government/SanctioningAuthoritytorefuse
sanctiontoprosecuteaccusedno.6Saibaba.Hence,thoughsanction
atExh.349againstaccusedno.6Saibabawasgrantedafterframingof
chargeatExh.66inSessionCaseNo.13/2014becauseofsubsequent
arrest of accused no.6 Saibaba, the evidence of witnesses was
recorded in presence of accused no.6 Saibaba and other accused
persons.Hence,noprejudiceiscausedtoaccusedno.6Saibaba.

680] Hesubmittedthattheprosecutionhasfiledapplicationat
Exh.151 on 14.12.2015 for recalling of P.W.1 Santosh Bawne as
sanctionorderwasfiledbytheInvestigationOfficerinSessionCase
no.13/2014. Tothatapplicationaccusedno.1to6havegivenno
objectionandthereafterevidenceofP.W.1SantoshBawnewasagain
recordedafresh. Thedefencehasnottakenobjectionofabsenceof
sanctionwhiletakingcognizanceatthetimeofframingofchargeand
the matter had gone to High Court and Supreme Court. On the
contrary,theyhavegivennoobjectionforrerecordingtheevidenceof
panchwitnessP.W.1SantoshBawne.Hence,noprejudiceiscausedto
thedefenceandinviewofprovisionsofSection465ofCr.P.C.,the
trialisnotvitiatedonthesegrounds.Therewasmisconceptionoflaw
inthemindofSanctioningAuthoritythatthearrestofaccusedno.6is
thepreconditiontograntsanction.

681] He submitted that, on perusal of schedule attached to

sanction order at Exh.17 accorded by Amitabh Rajan (P.W.19) it
reveals that Sanctioning Authority came to the conclusion that
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
556 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accusednos.1to6beingtheactivemembersofbannedorganisation
conspiredtogether toaidandabettheterroristactivitiesofbanned
terroristorganisationcalledasCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)and
itsfrontalorganisationRDFandaccusednos.1and2maintainedlive
contactwiththeundergroundmembersofCPI(Maoist)Narmadakka
andatherinstancewenttoBallarshatoreceiveaccusedNo.3Hem
Mishra who is a member of banned terrorist organisation CPI
(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDFandweretakingthemto
forestareaatGadchiroliasdirectedbynaxalladyNarmadakkafor
meetingwithseniormaoistcadrebuttheywerearrestedatsecluded
placenearAheriBusStand,andaccusedno.6Saibabahandedovera
microchip 16 GB memory card containing vital Maoist
communicationsandothermaoistdocumentsintheencryptedform
withintentiontofurthertheactivitiesofterroristorganisationofCPI
(Maoist) for circulation with underground naxal members in
Abuzmadforestareaandthescheduleannexedtothesanctionorder
clearlyrevealsthattherewasaprimafaciecaseagainstaccusedno.6
Saibabafortheoffencepunishableu/s13,18,20,38,39ofUAPAr/w
Sec.120B of IPC and there was no intention on the part of
Government to refuse sanction at any point of time and it can be
assumedfromfirstsanctionorderatExh.17thattherewasaprima
faciecaseagainstaccusedno.6Saibabaandsubsequentissuanceof
sanctionorderdoesnotinvalidatethesatisfactionoftheSanctioning
Authorityaboutfindingofprimafaciecaseagainstaccusedno.6for
the offence punishable u/s 13, 18, 20, 38, 39 of UAPA. The
SanctioningAuthorityKalyaneshwarBakshi(P.W.18)grantedsanction
inrespectofSessionsCaseno.130/2015toavoidtechnicalitiesafter
thearrestofaccusedno.6Saibaba.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
557 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

682] Spl.P.P. Shri Sathainathan further submitted that at the

timeofgrantingsanction,theSanctioningAuthorityisnotsupposed
toevaluatetheevidencebutithastoconsideronlyprimafaciecase
and on going through the material placed before Sanctioning
Authorityespecially,mirrorimage,confessionofaccusednos.1and2
aprimafaciecaseu/s13,18,20,38,39ofUAPAwasmadeoutand
thesanctionisvalidlyaccordedinrespectofaccusednos.1to6and
hesubmittedthatthefirstsanctionorderissuedbyAmitabhRajan
(P.W.19) at Exh.17 should be considered as sanction for all the
accusedno1to6inspiteofthefactthattoavoidtechnicalitiesP.W.18
Kalyaneshwar Bakshi accorded sanction vide Exh.349 in respect of
accusedno.6Saibaba.

683] HefurthersubmittedthatundertheprovisionsofSection
45(2) of the UAPA and by issuance of Government Notification
No.TER410PK216 dated 26th May, 2010, the Government of
MaharashtraappointedtheDirectorofPublicProsecutorisauthorized
to review the proposal for grant of sanction. As such Director of
Public Prosecutor, Maharashtra State has been designated as an
independent authority to review the proposal of sanction. Hence,
complianceofSection45(2)ofUAPAhasbeenmade.However,there
is delay of few days for grant of sanction in Sessions Case
No.130/2015thatdoesnotvitiatethetrialastheprovisionsofthese
Rulesarenotmandatoryandtheyaredirectoryinnature.Insupport
of his submission he placed reliance on the judgment of the
Honourable High Court of Bombay in case of Mohammed Bilal
Gulam Rasul Kagzi .vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors.,
CriminalApplicationNo.1256of2011decidedon19.12.2012.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
558 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

684] HesubmittedthattheoffencepunishableunderSection
13ofUAPAwhichisfallingunderChapterIIIofUAPA,theAssistant
Chief Secretary (Home) is a competent authoritytogrant sanction
andinsupportofhissubmissionhereliedonGovernmentGazette
Notification dated 21st June, 2007 which is issued under the
provisionsofSection45(i)oftheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act
1967 (37 of 1967), whereby the Additional Secretary of Home
Departmentweredesignatedascompetentauthoritytograntsanction
foroffencefallsunderchapterIIIofUAPA.

685] Forallabovegroundshesubmittedthatavalidsanction
has been granted by Sanctioning Authorities in respect of accused
nos.1to6byapplicationofmindandaftergoingthroughthematerial
placedbeforethem. Insupportofhissubmissionheplacedreliance
onthejudgmentofState(NCTofDelhi)vs.NavjotSandhu(2005)
reportedin11SCC600inwhichtheHon'bleApexCourtinParaNo.
16 hasconsideredprocedureforaccordingsanctionwhereinithas
beenheldthatthegrantofsanctionisanexecutiveactandvalidity
thereofcannotberestedinthelightofprinciplesappliedtoquasi
judicialorders.

ArgumentofAdvocateShriGadlingonthepointofSanction

686] On the other hand, learned Advocate Shri Gadling for

accusednos.1to4and6hassubmittedthatinparano.1ofExh.355
P.W.19 Dr. Amitabh Rajan has stated that he was Home Secretary,
MaharashtraintherankofAdditionalChiefSecretary(Home)from
14th March, 2012 till his retirement i.e. 31122014 and his office
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
559 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

received the proposal from Addl. D.G. i/c of Special Operation

Maharashtra Police Directorate in relation to this crime on 7 th
February,2014andwhentheSectionOfficerreceivedthesame,on
thesamedayhesentittoDirectorofPublicProsecution,Maharashtra
State for independent assessment and opinion vide Exh.356 was
received by Director of Public Prosecution, Mumbai and on 11 th
February,2014hisofficereceivedtheindependentreviewreportfrom
I/cDirectorateofProsecution,MaharashtraStateundersignatureof
VidyaGundechaalongwithcoveringletterdated1122014andthe
reportdated1122014videExh.357and358respectively.

687] Hesubmittedthatinparano.2ofcrossexaminationthis
witness stated that the Deputy Secretary of Home (Special) has
studiedthefileon13.2.2014andputuptoSecretaryofLawHome
Special Maharashtra Government and thereafter on 14.2.2014 he
received the file for according sanction. He submitted that this
witness might have received the file on 14.2.2014 during working
hours i.e. in between 10.30 a.m. to 5.30 p.m. in the office and
thereafterhetookthefileforstudytohishome.Ifthisisso,howhe
studied the file early in the morning on 14.2.2014. Hence, his
evidenceisfalsethathereadthefileon14.2.2014.Thiswitnesshas
stated that he had gone through all the investigation papers
particularly CFSL report, softcopies of the electronic data, mirror
imagesofhardcopiescontainingtheelectronicgadgetsandthereafter
hecametoconclusionthatthereisconspiracybetweenaccusedno.1
to6. ButtheproposalofsanctionwhichwassentbyAheriPolice
Station does not indicate that the CFSL report, softcopies of the
electronic data, mirror images of hardcopies were sent to P.W.19
AmitabhRajan.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
560 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

688] Hesubmittedthatevidenceofthiswitnessrevealsthat16
GBmemorycardwassenttoCFSLbuttheproposalofsanctiondoes
notindicatethat16GBmemorycardwassenttoCFSL.Theevidence
ofP.W.11SuhasBawcheshowsthathemadeproposalforgrantof
sanctionagainstAccusednos.1to6however,theevidenceofP.W.19
AmitabhRajanshowsthathegrantedsanctioninrespectofaccused
nos.1 to 5 only and the sanction in respect of accused no.6 was
withheld only on the ground that he was not arrested. It is well
settled that cognizance is to be taken of the offence and not of
offenderandthisshowsthatheisnotknowingtheprovisionsoflaw.

689) He submitted that from the letter sent by P.W.11 Suhas

Bawcheitshowsthathehassentthedraftsanctionorderalongwith
calendereventandthesanctioningauthorityhasmerelyaccordedthe
sanctionandthereafteritwassenttoAheriPoliceStationby letter
dated6.4.2015atExh.350askingthemwhetherthereanycorrection
istobemadeinthesanctionorder.Thisshowsthatthesanctioning
authorityhasnotappliedthemindtothesanctioninthecase.

690] He submitted that in the schedule at Exh.17 it is

mentioned that accused no.1 Mahesh and no.2 Pandu went to
Ballarsha at the instance of naxal lady Narmadakka on 22.8.2014,
however,intheconfessionalstatementbeforetheMagistrate,accused
statedthedateas2022andinthesanction22.2.2014ismentioned.
Hesubmittedthatthiswitnessadmittedincrossexaminationthathe
cannotsaywhetherhecametotheconclusionfromstatementofany
witness that accused no.4 Prashant Rahi was the member of CPI
(Maoist).
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
561 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

691] Hesubmittedthatthiswitnesscametotheconclusionthat
microchipwashandedovertoaccusedno.3HemMishrabyaccused
no.6Saibababutthereisnosuchstatementonrecordthataccused
no.6Saibabahandedovermicrochiptoaccusedno.3HemMishrato
be handedover to the underground naxal and this conclusion is
baseless and not sustainable and hence, it shows that sanctioning
authorityhasnotappliedmindwhilegrantingsanction.

692] He submitted that in para no.1 of crossexamination

Exh.345 P.W.18 Kalyaneshwar Bakshi has stated that from 31 st
December,2014hewasworkingasAdditionalChiefSecretary,Home
Department, State of Maharashtra, Bombay and in Crime no.
3017/2013ofPoliceStation,Aherihereceivedproposalofsanctionin
respect of accused no.6 Saibaba and proposal first came to the
RegistrationDepartmentofMantralaya,thereafterthesaidproposal
was forwarded tothe concerneddeskandfromconcerneddeskto
DeputySecretaryandthereaftertheproposaldirectly comestohim
forexaminationfromDeputySecretaryandon1522015hereceived
the proposal and on 2622015 he sent file to Director of Public
Prosecutor for independent review and on 4th March, 2015 he
receivedtheindependentreviewfromDirectorofPublicProsecutor
videExh.348. Hesubmittedthatnoneoftheprosecutionwitnesses
haveidentifiedthesignatureofDirectorofPublicProsecutionassuch
saiddocumentcannotbereadinevidence. Hesubmittedthatthe
evidenceofthiswitnessclearlyrevealsthathehadgonethroughall
the investigation papersparticularlyCFSLreport,softcopiesofthe
electronicdata,mirrorimagesofhardcopiescontainingtheelectronic
gadgetsandthereafterhecametoconclusionthatthereisconspiracy
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
562 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

betweenaccusedno.1to6.Buttheproposalofsanctionwhichwas
sentbyAheriPoliceStationdoesnotindicatethattheCFSLreport,
softcopiesoftheelectronicdata,mirrorimagesofhardcopieswere
sent to this witness. This shows nonapplication of mind by
SanctioningAuthority.

693] He submitted that P.W.No.18 Kalyaneshwar Bakshi

admittedthatthereisnostatementmentionedonrecordtoshowthat
accused no.6 Saibaba directed accused no.3 Hem Mishra to go to
Ballarshaorthereisnostatementofanywitnessonrecordtoshow
that accused no.6 Saibaba gave maoist literature to accused no.4
PrashantRahitohandovertoundergroundnaxalsinAbuzmadforest
inGadchirolianditisevidentfromthefactthatsanctionorderwas
forwardedbyAheriPoliceStationbykeepingsomespacesblankand
said blank spaces were filled up by this witness and he sent the
sanction order to Aheri Police Station. This shows that he never
appliedmindbeforegrantingsanction.

694] Hesubmittedthatthereisnothingonrecordtoshowthat
allthedocumentsweresuppliedtotheDirectorofPublicProsecutor
beforeindependentreviewandindependentreviewExh.358doesnot
indicate that there is application of mind by Director of Public
Prosecution.

695] He submitted that the sanction order Exh.17 issued by

P.W.19 Amitabh Rajan in Sessions Case No.13/2014 and sanction
orderExh.349issuedbyP.W.18KalyaneshwarBakshiinSessionscase
no.130/2015arecrypticandissuedwithoutapplicationofmindand
without considering the material placed before these Authorities.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
563 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Thereisnoreferenceinbothsanctionorders(Exh.17and349)about
the fact that these sanctioning authorities have gone through
particular document before according sanction. The said sanction
ordersareissuedinmechanicalmannerwithoutapplicationofmind.

696] Hefurthersubmittedthatthereisnomentioninsanction
order (Exh.349) about the fact that the file was referred for
independent review to Director of Public Prosecutor which is
designatedasanauthorityforindependentreviewu/s45ofUAPA.
HefurthersubmittedthatthesanctionisnotgrantedinbothSession
CaseNos.13/2014and130/2015withinthetimeprescribedbythe
provisionsofUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Recommendationand
SanctionofProsecutionRules,2008.Hefurthersubmittedthatthere
isnoevidenceonrecordtoshowthatfilewasreferredtotheHome
Ministerandheaccordedthesanction. Assuchtheprosecutionhas
not proved the fact that the competent authority has granted the
sanction.Astheprosecutionhasfailedtoprovethatpropersanction
wasaccordedagainstaccusednos.1to5inSessionsCaseNo.13/2014
and against accused no.6 Saibaba in Sessions Case No.130/2015,
hence,heprayedforacquittalofalltheaccused.

697] In support of his submission defence counsel placed

relianceonthefollowingjudgments

1] Jagannath Maruti Tekade .vs. State of

Maharashtra reported in 1991 MH.L.J 976,
whereinitisobservedthat

Sanction order must pass the requisite test of

legality if there is no application of mind, the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
564 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

sanction order is vitiated court will have to take

judicial notice of the fact that in the
GovernmentSetuptheordersareoftentimes
drafted out by a department and put up to an
authorityforsignatureand,therefore,itwouldbe
extremelydangeroustoconcludeevenif the
sanctionorderiscorrectlyorperfectlydrafted,that
theauthoritywhosigneditmusthaveappliedhis
mindinabsenceofdeposingbeforethecourtthat
hehadinfactdoneso.

2] Major Som Nath vs Union of India

reported in AIR 1971 SC 1910, wherein it is
observedthat

Essentialsofsanctionforasanctiontobevalidit
mustbeestablishedthatthesanctionwasgivenin
respect of the facts constituting the offence with
which the accused is proposed to be charged.
Though, it is desirable that the facts should be
referredtointhesanctionitself,nonthelessifthey
do not appear on the face of it, the prosecution
mustestablishaliundebyevidencethatthosefacts
wereplacedbeforethesanctioningauthorities.

3]P.C.JoshiandAnr.vs.StateofUttarPradesh
reported in AIR1961 SC 387, wherein it is
observedthat

Sanction Order Requirement of that

Sanctioning authority must be shown to have
appliedhismindtothefactsbeforegivingsanction
for prosecution Mere production of a document
which setsoutthenameofthepersonstobe
prosecutedandtheprovisionsofthestatuealleged
to be contravened and purporting to bear the
signature of an officer competent to grant the
sanction where such sanction is a condition
precedencetotheexerciseofjurisdictiondoesnot
investthecourtwithjurisdictiontotrytheoffence.
If the facts which constitute the charge do not
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
565 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

appear on the face of the sanction, it must be

establish by extraneous evidence that those facts
were placed before the authority competent to
grant the sanction and that the authority had
applied his mind to those facts before giving
sanction.

4] Rambhai Nathabhai Gadhvi and Ors. .vs.

StateofGujrat reported in
MANU/SC/0859/1997 : AIR 1997 SC 3475,
whereinit isheldthat:

AstheprovisionofTADAaremorerigorousandthe
penalty provided is more stringent and the
procedure for trial prescribed in summery and
compendious,theSanctioningprocessmentionedin
Section 20A(2) must have been adopted more
seriously and exhaustively than the sanction
contemplatedinotherpenalstatutes.Iftherewas
no valid sanction the Designated court gets no
jurisdiction to try a case against any person
mentionedinthereportasthecourtisforbidden
fromtakingcognizanceoftheoffencewithoutsuch
sanction without a valid sanction, such action is
without jurisdiction and any proceeding adopted
thereunderwillalsobewithoutjurisdiction In
thecaseofManoranjanPrasadChoudary.Vs.State
ofBihar(2005XXXOCR(SC)370,itisheldthat
itisalsowellsettledpropositionoflawthatwhere
thereisnosanctionbythe competent authority,
theproceedingitselfstandsvitiated.Inviewofthe
conclusions/ finding reached hereinabove, this
court is of the considered view that, no
cognizance could have been taken against the
petitionersintheabsenceofanyvalidsanctionof
theprosecutionandthisregard,althoughsanction
for prosecution had been obtained, yet the same
wasnotbaseduponareviewbyavalidlyappointed
authority to carry out independent review of
evidence obtained in course of investigation.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
566 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Therefore, the veryfoundationforobtainingsuch

sanction being not in consonance with law, the
orderofcognizancedated16.7.2010passedbythe
learnedJ.M.F.C.BanpurinG.R.Caseno.16of2010
ought to be quashed and this court directs
accordingly.(Emphasissupplied)

5] StateofUPvsBabuRamUpadhayayaAIR
1961SC751ConstitutionalBench inwhichitis
heldthat

Rules, Regulations or byelaws Statutory Rules

PrinciplesofConstructionofTobepresumedasif
intheActValidaidofConstruction

(2)The rulesmust be treatedforallpurposesof

Constructionorobligationexactlyasiftheywerein
the act and are to be of the same effect as if
containedintheact,andaretobejudiciallynoticed
forallpurposesofconstructionorobligation.

ConclusiononthepointofSanction

698] In order to appreciate the evidence adduced by on

prosecutiononthepointofsanction,itisnecessarytohavelookon
theprovisionsofSection45oftheUAPA.TheprovisionsofSection
45ofUAPAarereproducedasunder:

45.Cognizanceofoffences
(1)NoCourtshalltakecognizanceofanyoffence

(i)UnderChapterIIIwithouttheprevioussanctionof
theCentralGovernmentoranyofficerauthorisedby
theCentralGovernmentinthisbehalf;
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
567 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(ii) underChaptersIVandVIwithouttheprevious
oftheCentralGovernmentor,asthecasemaybe,the
State

Government, and where such offence is

committed against the Government of a foreign
countrywithouttheprevioussanctionoftheCentral
Government.

(2) Sanction for prosecution under subsection (1)

shallbegivenwithinsuchtimeasmaybeprescribed
only after considering the report of such authority
appointedbytheCentralGovernmentor,asthecase
maybe,theStateGovernmentwhichshallmakean
independentreviewoftheevidencegatheredinthe
courseofinvestigationandmakearecommendation
withinsuchtimeasmaybeprescribedtotheCentral
Governmentor,as the case may be, the State
Government.(emphasissupplied)

699] On 31/12/2008, The Unlawful Activities (Prevention)

Amendment Act, 2008 (Central Act 35 of 2008) came into force
whereby,Section43DandSection45(2)wereinsertedintheUAP
Act.ItisalsotobenotedthatTheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)
(Recommendation and Sanction of Prosecution) Rules 2008, came
intoforcevideSO3014(E)dated31.12.2008,publishedinGazette
ofIndia,Extra.,Pt.II,Sec.3(ii)dated31.12.2008.Theseruleswere
framedunderSection45(2)readwithSection52(2)(f)oftheUAPA,
1967. The necessary script of the same can be given for ready
referenceasunder:

THEUNLAWFULACTIVITIES(PREVENTION)
(RECOMMENDATIONANDSANCTIONOF
PROSECUTION)RULES,2008
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
568 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

3. Time limit for making a recommendation by

the Authority The Authority shall, under sub
section(2)ofsection45oftheAct,makeitsreport
containing the recommendations to the Central
Government or, as the case may be, the State
Governmentwithinsevenworkingdaysofthereceipt
oftheevidencegatheredbytheinvestigatingofficer
undertheCode.

4. Time limit for sanction of prosecution The

centralGovernmentor,asthecasemaybe,theState
Governmentshall,undersubsection(2)ofsection
45oftheAct,takeadecisionregardingsanctionfor
prosecutionwithinsevenworkingdaysafterreceipt
oftherecommendationsoftheAuthority.
[1.VideS.O.3014(E),dated31/12/2008,published
in the Gazette of India, Ext. Pt. II, S. 3(ii), dated
31/12/2008. 2. Inserted by G.S.R. 224(E), dated
31/3/2009](emphasissupplied).

700] Onperusalofprovisionsofsection45UAPAitrevealsthat
foroffenceunderChapterIIIofUAPAtheCompetentAuthorityfor
grant of sanction is Secretary's of the State Government who are
AdministrativeinchargeoftheHomeDepartment.Tothateffectthe
CentralGovernmenthasissuedaNotificationintheGazetteofIndia
on21June2007.Thesaidnotificationisreproducedasunder:

MINISTRYOFHOMEAFFAIRS
NOTIFICATION
NewDelhi,the21stJune,2007

S.O.1004(E) In exercise of powers conferred by

Section45(i)oftheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,
1967 (37 of 1967), the Central Government hereby
authorizestheSecretariesoftheStateGovernmentsand
Union Territories and Administrations incharge of the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
569 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Home Department, to exercise the powers to sanction

prosecution in respect of offences punishable under
ChapterIII of the said Act triable by a Court in their
respectiveStatesandUnionTerritories.

[F.No.1/17014/14/07IS.VII]
L.C.GOYAL,
Jt.Secy.

ComplianceofSec.45(2)UAPA

The state of Maharashtra by notification in

officialgadgetsdesignatedDirectorofPublicProsecutor
of State of Maharashtra as a authority for independent
review the proposal of sanction under section 45(2) of
UAPA.Thesaidnotificationisreproducedasunder:

The Government of Maharashtra by order dated

28.5.2010publishedinMaharashtraGovernmentGazette
dated28.5.2010,Extraordinary,Part4A,Page1,Director
of Public Prosecutor appoints as an Authority for
independentreviewofproposalofsanctionunderUAPA.
The said Government Notification is reproduced as
under:
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub
section(2)ofsection45oftheUnlawfulActivities
(Prevention) Act, 1967 (37 of 1967), the
Government of Maharashtra, hereby appoints the
Director of Prosecutions, Maharashtra State, to be
theAuthoritytomadeanindependentreviewofthe
evidencegatheredinthecourseofinvestigationand
tomakearecommendationwithaperiodofseven
working days from its receipts, to the State
Government. (Order dt.26.5.2010, published in
Mah.GovernmentGazettedt.28.5.2010)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
570 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

TheMaharashtraGovernmentRulesofBusiness
GeneralAdministrationDepartment
(Sachivalaya,Bombay400032,datedthe26th
June1975

701] Furtheritisnecessarytohavelookontheprovisionsof
theRulesframedbytheMaharashtraGovernmentinexerciseofthe
powers conferred by clauses (2) and (3) of Article 166 of the
Constitution of India under the title of The Maharashtra
Government Rules of Business General Administration
Department (Sachivalaya, Bombay400032,datedthe 26thJune
1975. These Rules were framed by Maharashtra Government in
exerciseofthepowersconferredbyclauses(2)and(3)ofArticle166
of the Constitution of India. RelevantRules5,7,12and13are
reproducedasunder:

Rule5 :TheGovernorshallontheadviseofthe
ChiefMinisterallotamongtheMinistersthebusiness
of the Government by assigning one or more
DepartmentsorpartofDepartmentstothechargeof
aMinister:

Providedthatnothinginthisruleshallprevent
the assigning of one Department to the charge of
morethanoneMinister.

Rule7 :EachDepartmentoftheMantralayashall
consist of the Secretary to the Government, who
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
571 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

shallbetheofficialheadofthatDepartmentandor
suchotherofficersandservantssubordinatetohim
astheStateGovernmentmaydetermine:
Providedthat
(a) more than one Department may be
placedin chargeofthesameSecretary;
(b)theworkofaDepartmentmaybedivided
betweentwoormoreSecretaries.

Rule 12 : All orders or instruments made or

executed by on behalf of the Government of the
Stateshallbeexpressedtobemadebyorbyorder
executedinthenameoftheGovernor.

Rule 13 : Every order or instrument of the

GovernmentoftheStateshallbesignedeitherbya
Secretary,anAdditionalSecretary,aJointSecretary,
a Deputy Secretary, an Under Secretary or an
AssistantSecretaryorsuchotherofficerasmaybe
specially empowered in that behalf and such
signature shall be deemed to be proper
authenticationofsuchorderorinstrument.

702] In the present case, the accused nos.1 to 6 have been

chargedforoffencepunishableu/s13,18,20,38,39ofUAPAread
withSection120BofIPCandP.W.no.18AmitabhRajanandP.W.19
Kalyaneshwar Bakshi in their examination stated that they issued
sanctionordersaftergoingthroughthematerialplacedbeforethem
andassuchtheyarecompetentpersonstoissueandsignsanction
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
572 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

orders as per the provision of Rule 12 of The Maharashtra

Government Rulesof Business GeneralAdministrationDepartment
(Sachivalaya, Bombay 400 032, dated the 26th June 1975 The
sanction order in Sessions Case no.13/2014 in respect of accused
nos.1to5alongwithitsSchedulearereproducedasunder:
SANCTIONORDER(EXH.17
)
HomeDepartment(Special),
Mantralaya,MadamKamaRoad,
Mumbai400032
Date:15thFebruary,2014

NoNAX0214/C.R.37/Spl1B:WHEREAS,ithasbeenreported
totheGovernmentofMaharashtrathatMaheshKarimanTirakiand
Fiveothers,(hereinafterreferredtoasthesaidAccusedpersons)as
specifiedinColumn1oftheScheduleappendedhereto(hereinafter
referredtoasthesaidSchedule)committedtheoffenceasspecified
inColumn3oftheSchedule.

ANDWHEREAS,itappearstotheGovernmentofMaharashtra
thatonthedateandattheplacementionedinthesaidSchedule,the
accusedpersonhavecommittedanoffence(hereinafterreferredtoas
thesaidoffence)punishableundersection13,18,20,38and39of
the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (Amendment 2008)
(hereinafterreferredtoasthesaidAct),

AND WHEREAS, after having fully examined the material

placedbeforemeandconsideringallfacts,Iamsatisfiedthatitis
necessaryintheinterestofjusticethattheaccusedpersonsshouldbe
prosecutedintheCourtofcompetentjurisdictionforthesaidoffences
underSection13,18,20,38and39ofthesaidAct,

NOW, THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Clause(ii)ofsubsection(1)ofsection45ofthesaidAct,sanctionis
hereby accorded to the prosecution against the arrested accused
persons for taking cognizance of the offence by the Court of the
competentjurisdiction.
Sd/
(Dr.AmitabhRajan)
AdditionalChiefSecretarytotheGovernmentof
MaharashtraHomeDepartment
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
573 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

703] Further, Schedule annexed to the said sanction order

(Exh.17)isreproducedasunder:

SCHEDULE

Perticulars of accused Police Station Criminal acts of the accused

person (i. e. name, Crime Register persons
address etc.) No. and date 3.
1. 2.
Arrested P. Stn. Aheri C. R. Accused persons
No. 3017/2013 U/s mentioned herein column No.
1) Mahesh Kariman 13, 18, 20, 38, 39 1 entered into criminal
Tiraki, of Unlawful conspiracy jointly and
age 24 yrs, at Activities severally to aid and abet the
-Murewada, Tal. (Prevention) Act, terrorist activities of banned
Etapalli, Dist. 1967 (Amendment terrorist organisation called as
Gadchiroli Act 2008) communist party of India
Registered on date (Maoist). (Hereinafter refered
22/08/2013 at to as CPI (Maoist).
2) Pandu Pora 2130 hrs. They knew fully
Narote, age 27 yrs. at - well that their acts will
Murewada, Tal. facilitate the commission of a
Etapalli, Dist. terrorist act or any act
Gadchiroli preparatory to the commission
of a terrorist act.
In Pursuance of
3) Hem Keshaodatta the said criminal conspiracy,
Mishra, age 32 yrs. At- accused mentioned at Sr. No. 1
Kunjbargal, and 2 maintained live contact
Post. Nagarkhan, Dist- with the underground member
Almora (Uttarakhand) of CPI (Maoist) name
Narmadakka and at her
instance went to Ballarsha,
4) Prashant Rahi S/o
Dist. Chandrapur on-
N. B. Sangalikar, age
22/08/2013 to receive the
54 Yrs. at 87,
accused No. 3 who is a
Chandrashekhar Nagar,
member of banned terrorist
Rishikesh, Deharadun
organisation CPI (Maoist) and
(Uttarakhand)
both accused No. 1 and 2 were
attempting to take the accused
5) Prasad @ Vijay No. 3 to Abuzmad forest area
Nan Tiraki, age 30 yrs, as directed by Narmadakka for
at Beloda, P. S. Bande, meeting with senior maoist
Distt. Kanker cadre who are hiding in
(Chattisgarh) Abuzmad forest. Both accused
No. 1 and 2 knew fully well
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
574 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

that any such meeting of the

Yet to be arrested
6) G. N. Saibaba,
age 47 yrs, Warden
House, Gwyer hall,
Delhi University road,
Delhi-7
underground member of
banned terrorist organisation
will facilitate the commission
of terrorist acts.
Accused at Sr.
No. 5 in pursuance to his
criminal conspiracy with the
underground member by name
Ramdar of CPI (Maoist)
received the accused No. 4
who is also a member of
banned terrorist organisation.
CPI (Maoist) and as per the
directions of Ramdar was
attempting to take accused No.
4 to Abuzmad forest areas for
meeting the senior Maoist
cadres who are hiding in
Abuzmad forest areas,
knowing fully well that any
such meeting of the
underground members of
banned terrorist organisation
will facilitate the commission
of terrorist act.
Accused at Sr.
No. 3, 4 and 6 entered into the
criminal conspiracy amongst
each other and in pursuance to
the said conspiracy, accused
No. 6 arranged meetings of
accused No. 3 and 4 with the
underground members of
banned terrorist orgainsation.
CPI (Maoist) Who are hiding
in the Abuzmad forests.
In furtherance
of the said conspiracy, accused
at Sr. No. 6 handed over a
micro-chip SD memory card
containing vital Maoist
communications and other
maoist documents in the
encrypted form with intention
to further the activities of
terrorist organisation. CPI
(Maoist) and asked accused
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
575 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

No.3 to go to Ballarshah and

also told him that he will be
received at Ballarshah by the
representative of Narmadakka
(i. e. accused No. 1 and 2) and
will be taken to her where he
should deliver the memory
card to Narmadakka.
Accused No. 6
also gave maoist documents to
accused No. 4 to be delivered
to the underground cadres of
CPI (Maoist) in Abuzmad
forests. Both accused No. 3
and 4 willfully carried memory
cards and document with them
and travelled from Delhi to
deliver these things to senior
maoist cadres as directed by
accused No. 6. Accused No. 3,
4 and 6 Knew fully well that
any such communications will
facilitate the terrorist activities
of CPI (Maoist)
Accused No. 3,
4 and 6 with the intention to
further the activities of CPI
(Maoist) arranged their
meeting with the underground
members of CPI (Maoist ) and
thus supported the CPI
(Maoist) to further its terrorist
activities.
Hence, accused
have committed the offence
punishable u/s. 13, 18, 20, 38
and 39 of Unlawful Activities
(Prevention) Act, 1967.
(Amendment 2008).

By Order and in the name of the Governor of Maharashtra

(Dr. Amitabh Rajan)

Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Maharashtra
Home Department.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
576 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

704] The sanction order in Sessions Case no.130/2015 in

respect of accused no.6 Saibaba alongwith its Schedule are
reproducedasunder:

SANCTIONORDER(EXH.349
)
HomeDepartment(Special),
2ndFloor,MainBuilding,
Mantralaya,MadamKamaRoad,
Mumbai400032
Date:6thApril,2015.

NoNAX0214/C.R.37(PartII)/Spl1B:WHEREAS,ithasbeen
reported to the Government of Maharashtra that G.N. Saibaba
(hereinafterreferredtoasthesaidAccusedperson)asspecifiedin
Column1oftheScheduleappendedhereto(hereinafterreferredtoas
thesaidSchedule)committedtheoffenceasspecifiedinColumn3
oftheSchedule.

ANDWHEREAS,itappearstotheGovernmentofMaharashtra
thatonthedateandattheplacementionedinthesaidSchedule,the
AccusedPersonhascommittedanoffence(hereinafterreferredtoas
thesaidoffence)punishableundersection13,18,20,38and39of
the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (Amendment 2008)
(hereinafterreferredtoasthesaidAct),

AND WHEREAS, after having fully examined the material

placedbeforemeandconsideringallfacts,Iamsatisfiedthatitis
necessaryintheinterestofjusticethattheAccusedPersonshouldbe
prosecutedintheCourtofcompetentjurisdictionforthesaidoffences
underSection13,18,20,38and39ofthesaidAct,

NOW, THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by

Clause(ii)ofsubsection(1)ofsection45ofthesaidAct,sanctionis
hereby accorded to the prosecution against the arrested Accused
Person for taking cognizance of the offence by the Court of the
competentjurisdiction.

Sd/
(K.P.Bakshi)
AdditionalChiefSecretarytotheGovernmentof
MaharashtraHomeDepartment
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
577 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

705] Further, Schedule annexed to the said sanction order

(Exh.349)isreproducedasunder:
SCHEDULE

Particulars of the Police Station Criminal acts of the

accused person (I. e. Crime Register accused persons
name, address etc.) No. and date
1.
2. 3.
Arrested accused P. Stn. Aheri C. Arrested accused
R. No. with chargesheeted accused
G. N. Saibaba, age- 3017/2013 U/s mentioned in Column No. 1 of
47 yrs, Warden 13, 18, 20, 38, the Schedule entered into
House, Gwyer hall, 39 of Unlawful criminal conspiracy jointly and
Delhi University Activities severally to aid and abet the
road, Delhi-7 (Prevention) terrorist activities of banned
Act, 1967 terrorist organisation
Already (Amendment Communist Party of India
Chargesheeted 2008) (Maoist).
Registered on In pursuance of the said
1) Mahesh Kariman date 22/08/2013 criminal conspiracy, already
Tiraki, age 24 yrs, at chargesheeted accused
Murewada, Tal. mentioned at Sr. No. 1 and 2
Etapalli, Dist. maintained live contact with
Gadchiroli. the underground member of
2) Pandu Pora CPI (Maoist) by name
Narote, age 27 yrs. at Narmadakka and at her
- Murewada, Tal. instance went to Ballarsha,
Etapalli, Dist. Dist. Chandrapur on-
Gadchiroli 22/08/2013 to receive the
already chargesheeted accused
3) Hem Keshaodatta No. 3 who is a member of
Mishra, age 32 yrs. banned terrorist organisation
At- Kunjbargal, CPI (Maoist) and both already
Post. Nagarkhan, chargesheeted accused No. 1
Dist-Almora and 2 were attempting to take
(Uttarakhand) the already chargesheeted
accused No. 3 to Abuzmad
forest area as directed by
4) Prashant Rahi S/o Narmadakka for meeting with
N. B. Sangalikar, age senior maoist cadre who are
54 Yrs. at 87, hiding in Abuzmad forest.
Chandrashekhar Both already chargesheeted
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
578 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Nagar, Rishikesh, accused No. 1 and 2 knew

Deharadun
(Uttarakhand)
5) Prasad @ Vijay
Nan Tiraki, age 30
yrs, at Beloda, P. S.
Bande, Distt. Kanker
(Chattisgarh)
fully well that any such
meeting of the underground
member of banned terrorist
organisation will facilitate the
commission of terrorist acts.
Already
chargesheeted accused at Sr.
No. 5 in pursuance to his
criminal conspiracy with the
underground member by name
Ramdar of CPI (Maoist)
received the already
chargesheeted accused No. 4
who is also a member of
banned terrorist organisation.
CPI (Maoist) and as per the
directions of Ramdar was
attempting to take already
chargesheeted accused No. 4 to
Abuzmad forest areas for
meeting the senior maoist
cadres who are hiding in
Abuszmad forest areas,
Knowing fully well that any
such meeting of the
underground members of
banned terrorist organisation
will facilitate the commission
of terrorist act.
Already
chargesheeted accused at Sr.
No. 3, 4 and Arrested Accused
are entered into the criminal
conspiracy amongst each other
and in pursuance to the said
conspiracy, arrested accused
arranged meetings of already
chargesheeted accused No. 3
and 4 with the underground
members of banned terrorist
organisation. CPI (Maoist)
who are hiding in the Abuzmad
forests.
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
579 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

In furtherance of the
said conspiracy, arrested
accused handed over a micro-
chip SD memory card
containing vital maoist
communications and other
maoist documents in the
encrypted from with intention
to further the activities of
terrorist organisation. CPI
(Maoist) and asked already
chargesheeted accused No. 3 to
go to Ballarshah and also told
him that he will be received at
Ballarshah by the
representative of Narmadakka
(I. e. already chargesheeted
accused No. 1 and 2) and will
be taken to her where he
should deliver the memory
card to Narmadakka.
Arrested accused
also gave maoist documents to
already chargesheeted accused
No. 4 to be delivered to the
underground cadres of CPI
(Maoist) in Abuzmad forests.
Both already chargesheeted
accused No.3 and 4 willfully
carried memory cards and
document with them and
travelled from Delhi to deliver
these things to senior maoist
cadres as directed by arrested
accused. Already
chargesheeted accused No. 3, 4
and arrested accused knew
fully well that any such
communications will facilitate
the terrorist activities of CPI
(Maoist).
Hence, accused
have committed the offence
punishable u/s. 13, 18, 20, 38
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
580 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

and 39 of Unlawful Activities

(Prevention) Act, 1967.
(Amendment 2008).

By order and in the name of the Governor of Maharashtra,

(K. P. Bakshi)
Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of
Maharashtra
Home Department.

706] The first ground on which the defence advocate Shri

Gadling assailed the sanction orders (Exh.17 and 349) is that no
materialwasplacedbeforeSanctioningAuthoritiesandthatwithout
going through the material placed before them, the sanction was
accorded without the application of mind. On this point the
admissionsincrossexaminationofP.W.18KalyaneshwarBakshiand
P.W.19AmitabhRajanwerereliedbythedefenceonthegroundthat
beforeaccordingsanctionP.W.19AmitabhRajanmetRavindraKadam
and P.W.18 Kalyaneshwar Bakshi referred calender events before
enteringintowitnessbox. FurtherP.W.19AmitabhRajanadmitted
thathehasdiscussedwithSpecialPublicProsecutorbeforeentering
into witness box and in CFSL Report was not sent to P.W.No.18
Kalyaneshwar Bakshi. He statedin his evidence that he has gone
through CFSL Report. Further according to P.W.18 Kalyaneshwar
BakshihehascomeacrosswiththeNotificationbywhichtheRDFhas
beendeclaredasafrontalorganizationofCPI(Maoist)butthesaid
notification is not filed on record and P.W.18 Kalyaneshwar Bakshi
cametoknowfromthestatementofprosecutionwitnessesthatatthe
instance of accused no.6 Saibaba, accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
581 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accusedno.2PanduNarotehadgonetoBallarshah,howeverthisfact
isnotmentionedinthestatementofanywitness.

707] ItisimportanttonotethatP.W.18KalyaneshwarBakshiin
hisexaminationstatedthatbeforeissuingsanctionorder(Exh.349)
against accused no.6 he had gone through all the documents i.e.
searchwarrant, investigation papersalongwithchargesheet,CFSL
report, hard copies certified by CFSL Bombay, all seizure
panchanamas,arrestpanchanamasofaccusedandallotherpapersof
investigation which were submitted to him. Further, another
Sanctioning Authority P.W.19 Dr.Amitabh Rajan in his examination
statedthatbeforeissuingthesanctionorder(Exh.17)againstaccused
nos.1to5hehadgonethroughallinvestigationpapers,particularly
CFSLreport,softcopiesoftheelectronicdata,mirrorimagesofhard
copiescontainingtheelectronicgadgets,Art.1to41.

708] AttheinstanceofAdvocateforaccusedno.1to6byorder
onapplication(Exh.478)originalfileregardinggrantofsanctionin
S.C.No.13/2014and130/2015werecalledandtheprosecutionhas
filedoriginalrecordregardinggrantofsanctioninS.C.No.13/2014,it
contains1189pages.Ongoingthroughthenotewhichwassignedby
Section Officer, Deputy Secretary, Under Secretary, Principal
SecretaryandMinisterforHome,itrevealsthatbeforegrantingthe
sanction under UAPA the sanctioning authority had considered all
investigationpapers,statementsofwitnessesandopinionofDirector
ofPublicProsecutor.TheproposalofsanctioninS.C.No.13/2014was
forwarded by Superintendent of Police, Gadchiroli alongwith
followingdocumentsandcasepapers
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
582 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

i)CopyofFIR,
(ii)Panchanamas,
(iii)Calenderevents,
(iv)Copiesofscreenshotoffacebookaccountofaccusedno.3
HemMishra,
(v)Copiesofdocumentcontainedin16GBmemorycard
(ArticleA17toA21),
(vi) Eight pages relating to naxal literature seized from
possession of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi and other investigation
papersalongwithchargesheet.

709] Further the Superintendent of Police, Gadchiroli had

forwarded following documents alongwith sanction proposal in
S.C.No.130/2015:

(i)CopyofFIR,
(ii)Copyofpanchanamas,
(iii)Calenderevents,
(iv)Threepamphletsseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.1
Mahesh,
(v)Copiesofscreenshots(Art.A1toA16)ofactivitiesofface
bookaccountofaccusedno.3HemMishra,
(vi)247pagesretrievedfromelectronicgadgetsseizedfromthe
housesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba,
(vii)CDRofaccusedNo.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahiand
accusedno.6Saibabaand
(viii)allinvestigationpaperswereannexed.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
583 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

710] OnperusalofScheduleAnnexedtobothsanctionorders
(Exh.17and349)itisclearthatroleofeachaccusedandfactshave
beenconsideredbeforeaccordingsanction.TheScheduleannexedto
sanctionordersclearlyreflectsthatsanctionorderswereissuedafter
going through the relevant material placed before both the
sanctioningauthorities.Itiswellsettledprincipleoflawthatatthe
timeofgrantofsanctionforprosecutiontheSanctioningAuthorityis
notsupposedtoevaluatetheevidencebutithastoseeonlyprima
faciecaseforwhichtheaccusedischarged. Atthisjuncture,itis
necessarytoconsidertheobservationsof ApexCourtinpara12in
thecaseofStateofMaharashtra.v.IshwarPirajiKalpatrireported
inAIR1996SupremeCourt722,whereinitisobservedthat

(B)CriminalP.C.(2of1974),S.197Sanction
for prosecution According of Making of
statement while according sanction, that the
officersigningorderhadpersonallyscrutinised
thefileandhadarrivedatrequiredsatisfaction
Not necessary especially when order prima
facie showsthattherehasbeenapplicationof
mind and that material on record has been
examinedbyconcernedofficerbeforeaccording
sanction.

711] Inviewoftheevidenceledbytheprosecutionalongwith
documents i.e. sanction orders (Exh.17 and 349) and schedule
annexed to it clearly shows that before granting the sanction the
sanctioningauthorityhasconsideredallinvestigationpaperssupplied
alongwithchargesheetandthecopyofindependentreviewandthat
thereisnorequirementoflawthatsanctioningauthoritymustrefer
the documents on which they satisfied about the prima facie case
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
584 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

against the accused in the sanction order. The contention of the

Advocatefordefencethatinsanctionorderthefactthatindependent
reviewwasconsideredisnotmentioned,hasnoforce.

IndependentReviewbyDirectorofPublicProsecutor

712] As discussed above the Director of Public Prosecutor is

designated as an authority to independent by review the sanction
proposal under UAPA. Learned Counsel for accused by their
applicationatExh.478hadfortheproductionofthecopyofinward
andoutwardregisterfromtheofficeofDirectorofPublicProsecutor
AfterallowingtheapplicationbyCourt,theprosecutionhasfurnished
thecopyofinwardandoutwardregisteronrecordshowingthatthe
office of Director of Public Prosecutor had received proposal for
independent review of sanction under UAPA in Sessions Case
No.13/2014and130/2015.FurtherthereisaoralevidenceofP.W.18
Kalyaneshwarand19AmitabhRajantothateffect.

Sanctionagainstaccusednos.1to5inSessionsCaseNo.13/2014

713] Onperusaloforiginalfileinrespectofgrantofsanction
againstaccusednos.1to5inSessionsCaseNo.13/2014itrevealsthat
the Superintendent of Police, Gadchiroli had sent proposal for
accordingsanctioninCrimeNo.3017/2013on2.2.2014alongwith
documentsi.e.copyofFIR,panchanamas,calenderevents,copiesof
screenshotoffacebookaccountofaccusedno.3HemMishra,copies
ofdocumentcontainedin16GBmemorycard(ArticleA17toA21),
eight pages relating to naxal literature seized from possession of
accusedno.4PrashantRahiandotherinvestigationpapersalongwith
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
585 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

chargesheet to Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department and

then Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department forwarded
proposal to Director of Public Prosecutor,State of Maharashtra for
independentreviewon07.02.2014andJayantBhoir,SectionOfficer
forwardedthefiletoDirectorofPublicProsecutoron07.02.2014and
thereafter incharge Director of Public Prosecutor, Vidya Gundecha
submittedindependentreviewon11.02.2014(Exh.358)totheoffice
ofAdditionalChiefSecretary,Home,DeskOfficer,JayantBhoirvide
O.W. No.Opinion/79A/452/2014. After receipt of copy of
independent review the Section Officer, Under Secretary, Under
Secretary of Law, Secretary (Special), Additional Chief Secretary
(Home) had gone through the proposal from 13.02.2014 to
15.02.2014,thereafterAdditionalChiefSecretary(Home)forwarded
the same to Home Minister for approval and the Home Minister
considered the material i.e. all documents sent along with the
proposalforgrantofsanctionbySuperintendentofPolice,Gadchiroli
andapprovedthesaidfilebymakingnoteonit.

ThenoteofHon'bleMinisterofHomeisasunder:
Discussedp/11811189/c[Draft]aresubmittedforapproval.
ItisthefitcaseunderUAPA.

714] AfterapprovalofsanctionorderbyHomeMinisteritwas
sent to Additional Chief Secretary, P.W.19 Dr. Amitabh Rajan,
thereafterAdditionalChiefSecretary,(Home),StateofMaharashtra
accordedsanction(Exh.17)on15.02.2014againstaccusedno.1to5
under section 13,18,20,38,39 of UAPA and the same was sent to
SuperintendentofPolice,Gadchirolion15.02.2014itselfvideletter
O.W.NAX0214/C.R.37/Spl.1B.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
586 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Sanctionagainstaccusedno.6SaibabainSessionsCase
No.130/2015

715] Onperusaloftheoriginalfileinrespectofaccusedno.6
SaibabainSessionsCaseNo.130/2015,itrevealsthatSubDivisional
PoliceOfficer,AheriP.W.23RameshDhumalsenttheproposalthrough
theSuperintendentofPolicetoD.I.G.foraccordingsanctioninCrime
No.3017/2013 against accused no.6 Saibaba on 04.02.2015
alongwithsaidproposaldocumentsi.e.FIR,panchanamas,calender
events,threepamphletsseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.1
Mahesh,copiesofscreenshots(Art.A1toA16)ofactivitiesofface
bookaccountofaccusedno.3HemMishra,247pagesretrievedfrom
electronic gadgets seized from the house search of accused no.6
Saibaba,CDRofaccusedNo.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahiand
accused no.6 Saibaba and all investigation papers were annexed.
ThereafterDeputyD.I.G.throughD.I.G.(Nagpur)forwardedthesaid
proposaltoDG(Special),Mumbaion06.02.2015andDG,Mumbai
forwardedthesametoP.W.18KalyaneshwarBakshi,AdditionalChief
Secretary(Home)on21.02.2015andthereafterthesaidproposalwas
receivedbyHomeDepartmenton24.02.2015.

716] Afterreceiptofthesaidproposalthesamewassentfor
independentreviewbyShriJayantBhoir,SectionOfficer,Maharashtra
Government to Director of Public Prosecutor vide letter dated
26.02.2015atExhibit346underthesignatureofJayantBhoirand
Director of Public Prosecutor considered the proposal and gave
opinion of independent review (Exh.348) regarding the grant of
sanctionforprosecutionanditwassenttotheHomeDepartmenton
4thMarch2015andtothateffectthereisOutwardRegisterentry
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
587 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

No.Opinion/79A/541/15andalongwithit,theopinion letterdated
4.3.2015 (Exh.347) was forwarded and after receipt of copy of
independent review, the Section Officer, Under Secretary, Under
Secretary of Law, Secretary (Special), Additional Chief Secretary
(Home)gonethroughtheproposalandthereaftertheHomeMinister
considered the material i.e. all documents annexed along with the
proposalforaccordingsanction.Thereafteron6 thApril,2015P.W.18
KalyaneshwarBakshi,AdditionalChiefSecretary,HomeDepartment,
State of Maharashtra, Bombay accorded sanction (Exhibit 349)
against accused no.6 Saibaba under section 13, 18, 20, 38, 39 of
UAPAandthereafterthesaidsanctionwassenttoSuperintendentof
Police,Gadchirolialongwithcoveringletter(Exh.350).

717] At this juncture, it is necessary to consider the

observationsofApexCourtinpara8inthecaseofStateofMadhya
Pradesh.v.JiyalalreportedinAIR2010SC1451
(B) PreventionofCorruptionAct(49of1988,
S.19 Evidence Act (1 of 1872), S.114
SanctiontoprosecuteProofOrderpassedby
Magistrateincourseofperformingofficialduty
PresumptionattachestosuchorderExamination
ofMagistrateNotnecessary.(Para8)
`
The observation contained in para 8 is reproduced as
under
It was also not justified by the learned
single Judge toholdthat the District Magistrate
who had passed the sanction order should have
beensubsequentlyexaminedasawitnessbythe
prosecution in order to prove the same. The
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
588 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

sanctionorderwasclearlypassedindischargeof
routine official functions and hence there is a
presumptionthatthesamewasdoneinabonafide
manner. It was of course opened to the
respondenttoquestionthegenuinenessofvalidity
ofthesanctionorderbeforetheSpecialJudgebut
there was no requirement for the District
Magistrate to examine as a witness by the
prosecution.

718] Furtheritisnecessarytoconsidertheratiolaiddownby
theApexCourtinthecaseofStatethroughInspectorofPolice,A.P.
.vs.K.Narasimhacharyreportedin(2005)8SupremeCourtCases
364whereinitisobservedasunder:

A.EvidenceAct,1872S.47Provisionunder,
as to relevancy of opinion of any person
acquainted with handwriting of the person by
whomthedocumentinquestionissupposedtobe
written or signed Applicability of Order of
Sanction for prosecution issued in the name of
Governor and authenticated by Secretary to
Government Authenticity of, never question
High Court was not called upon to form an
opinionastobywhomthesaidorderofsanction
waswrittenandsignedPW6wasnotexamined
asanExpertorwasrequiredtogivehisopinionas
regardsthecorrectnessorotherwisethesignature
ofSecretaryHeld,HighCourtwronglyapplied
Section 47 It erred in holding that sanction
order was not proved in accordance with law.
(Paras14and15)

(B.) Evidence Act, 1872 Ss. 74 and 78

Publicdocument(inthiscase,orderofsanction
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
589 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

for prosecution issued in the name of Governor

and authenticated by Secretary to Govt.)
Authenticityof,notchallengedbeforetrialCourt
Held, respondent could not be permitted to
question the admissibility of the said document
for the first time before the appellate court
Prevention ofCorruptionAct,1988,S.19(Para
13)

719] Aspaperrelatingtograntofsanctionarepublicdocument
andtheactofgrantingthesanctionwasdonebypublicservantin
dischargeofhispublicdutyintheordinarycourseofpublicbusiness,
thepresumptionisthatthesaidacthasbeendonelawfullyattached
toit,unlessrebuttedbyotherside.

720] In view of above the opinion issued by Director of

Prosecution,intheSessionCaseno.13/2014atExh.357andSession
Caseno.130/2015atExh.348wereinthedischarge ofperforming
public duty. Hence it is not necessary to prove the signature of
DirectorofProsecutioninit.Hence,thereisnoforceintheargument
ofdefencecounselthatifsignatureisnotproved,documentcannot
besaidtobeproved.

WhetherP.W.No.18KalyaneshwarBakshiandP.W.No.19Amitabh
Rajanarecompetenttoissueandsignthesanctionorder(Exh.17
andExh.349)

721] AsdiscussedabovetheMaharashtraGovernmentRulesof
Business General Admission Department Rule 13 empowers the
Secretary,AdditionalSecretary,JointSecretary,DeputySecretaryand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
590 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Under Secretary or Asst. Secretary as or such as other officer

especially empowered on behalf of the Government to sign the
instrument and in view of thisthe sanctioning authority P.W.No.18
Kalyaneshwar Bakshi and P.W.19 Amitabh Rajan signed the order.
P.W.No.19AmitabhRajaninhisexaminationclearlystatedthatafter
perusal of proposalofsanctionthefile wasreferredtoMinisterof
HomeofStateofMaharashtraandasper(Rule5)oftheMaharashtra
Government Rules of Business the Governor of the State of
Maharashtra allot amongst theministerbusinessofgovernmentby
assigning one or more Departments or part of Departments to the
charge of a Minister and as such the Home Minister is the
Government. The Sanction order issued by both P.W.No.18
KalyaneshwarBakshiandP.W.No.19AmitabhRajaninfirsttwopara
clearlyrevealsthatthefilewasreferredtotheGovernmentforgrant
ofsanctionandgovernmentsatisfiedthatsanctionshouldbegranted.
Hence,P.W.No.18KalyaneshwarBakshiandP.W.No.19AmitabhRajan
inviewofpowerconferredonthembyRule13asdiscussedabove
signed the sanction order after obtaining the Government assents.
This shows that the Government has accorded the sanction for
prosecution against accused no.1 to 6 in S.C.No.13/2014 and
130/2015. Furtherattheinstanceofaccusedbypassingorderon
Exh.466dated3.1.2017originalfilerelatingtograntofsanctionin
SessionsCaseNos.13/2014and130/2015werecalledandonperusal
of note in file no.NAX0214/Pra.Kra.37/PartII (Home) relating to
grantofsanctioninSessionsCaseNo.13/2014andonperusalofnote
infileno.NAX0214/Pra.Kra.37(Home)relatingtograntofsanction
inSessionsCaseNo.130/2015itrevealsthatthesanctionorderwas
approvedbytheHomeMinister,assuchtheprosecutionhasproved
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
591 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

thatthegovernmenthasaccordedsanctionforoffenceunderUAPAin
SessionsCaseNo.13/2014and130/2015.

722] The next ground on which the defence assailed the

sanctionordersinSessionCaseno.13/2014againstaccusednos.1to
5andinSessionsCaseno.130/2015againstaccusedno.6Saibabais
thatthoseorderswerenotgrantedwithintheprescribedperiodas
required by provisions of The Unlawful Activities (Prevention)
(RecommendationandSanctionofProsecution)Rules,2008. In
thepresentcase,fromtheevidenceofInvestigatingOfficerP.W.no.11
SuhasBawchethatinSessionsCaseno.13/2014itisclearthathe
moved the proposal for grant of sanction on 1.2.2014 through
AdditionalSuperintendentofPolice,Aheri. TheevidenceofP.W.19
Dr.Amitabh Rajan is clear that he received proposal for according
sanction on 07.02.2014 and thereafter the sanction order was
receivedbyP.W.11SuhasBawcheon15.2.2014. Theproposalfor
sanctioninS.C.No.130/2015wassoughtbyP.W.23Dhumalthrough
S.P. Gadchiroli on 3.2.2015 and thereafter P.W.18 Kalyaneshwar
Bakshi accorded sanction on 06.04.2015 and therefore in
S.C.No.13/2014thereisnodelayinreceivingthesanction.InCase
No.130/2015thereisdelayofmorethan30daysinobtainingthe
sanction.

723] FurtherthelearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathianathanreliedon
Judgment in case of Mohammed Bilal Gulam Rasul KazivsThe
StateofMaharashtraandors.,CriminalApplicationNo.1256of
2011decidedon19.12.2012.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
592 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Thefactsofthecaseareasunder:

1] IntheabovementionedcaseF.I.R.was

lodgedagainstapplicanton21August,2008under
theprovisionsofUAPA. On9February,2010the
sanction was sought from Government for
prosecuting the applicant and sanction was
accordedon27August,2010.Inthemeantimefile
wasreferredforindependentreviewtoDirectorof
PublicProsecutor,StateofMaharashtraandDirector
ofPublicProsecutor,Maharashtrarecommendedto
accordsanctionbyletterdated11April,2010.

2] Therewasadelayofsevenmonthsfor
sanction as required under Rule 3 and 4 of the
Unlawful Activities (Prevention)(Recommendation
and Sanction of Prosecution) Rules, 2008. While
consideringthedelayofsevenmonths,theHon'ble
HighCourtobservedthatitiswellsettled,statutes
are to be fairly construed and faithfully applied
keeping in tune with legislative intent. The
legislative intention behind amended, which were
effectedon31.12.2008wasconsideredinpara11of
thesaidjudgment,whichisreproducedasunder

11. The statement of objects and reasons

whilepresentingthebillforamendmentinUAPAct
referred by the Central Government on 15th
December2008illustratethatkeepinginviewthat
India has been a front runner in the global fight
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
593 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

against terrorism, its commitment in terms of the

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373
dated28thSeptember2001andtheresolvenotto
allowanycompromiseinthefightagainstterrorism
theUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act1967was
amendedtomakeprovisionstodealwithterrorism
andterroristactivities.

Itisalsostated:

There have been significant developments

since then at the national and the international
level. Terrorist incidents and activities sponsored
fromacrosstheburdens,invariouspartsofIndia
andelsewhere,continuetocauseconcern. Hence,
thelegalframeworkfordealingwithsuchactivities,
includingmeasuresrelatedtofinancingofterrorism,
has been further reviewed. The administrative
Reforms Commission in its Report 'Combatting
Terrorism Protecting by Righteousness' has also
made various recommendations in this regard.
Suggestionsinthisrespecthavealsobeenreceived
fromvariousothersources.

12. There cannot be a quarrel that

provisions of section 45 of UAP Act read in
juxtaposition in section 42 of the said Act are
mandatory in its character, however, as stated
earlier,Rules3,and
4cannotbesobranded.

13. Section 45(2) is introduced as a

resolutionof2008amendment,thetimelimitand
sanctionfromtheauthorityandreviewarechecks
the Legislature desired to avoid false prosecution.
Themeasuresofthechecksaretheadministrative
exigencies, procedural supervision meant to speed
uptheadministrativeprocessafterinvestigationon
the basis of which the prosecution has to be
launched. Any fall out in adhering the time
schedule does not make out a case for breach of
eitherofthecomplianceofsection45(2).Ithasto
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
594 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

beshown,thedelayhasledtothedenialofright,
conferred upon the accused. There is no such
situationastheStatedesiredprosecutionanditwas
placed before the authority for review and then
needs to be recommended. The defect or
irregularity in official compliance has no adverse
bearingonthecompetenceofthesanctioninterms
ofsection45(2)ofthesaidAct.

14. It is again well settled, the term 'shall

appearing in the statute or 'rule' at times can be
interpretedas'should'andtheadmissionasmay,for
thatpurposes,Legislationintentsandschemeofthe
Legislation provides pivotal direction. Of course,
thereshouldnotbegrossdelayorrecklessnesson
the part of the State in complying the procedural
obligation.

724] InviewofobservationsmadebyBombayHighCourtin
the case of Mohammed Bilal Gulam Rasul KazivsThe State of
Maharashtraandors.(Citedsupra), itisclear thatprovisionsof
section 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Unlawful Activities Act, are
directory and delay caused in granting sanction is not fatal to the
prosecutioncase. Inthepresentcase,notesofsanctionforaccused
no.6Saibabawasdated31December,2014toHomeDepartmentand
sanctionwasaccordedon06042015.Therewasdelayof3months
anditwasnotshownthatanykindofprejudice,bynonaccordingthe
sanctionwithinstipulatedtime,wascausedtoaccusedno.6Saibaba.
Hence, mere delay of more than 30 days for issuance of sanction
orderinS.C.no.130/2015isnotagroundtovitiatetheproceeding
againstaccusedno.6Saibaba.

725] Theanotherimportantaspectwhichthoughnotargued,in
my opinion it is necessary to discuss in respect of sanction order
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
595 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(Exh.349) in Sessions Case No.130/2015 granted against accused

no.6Saibaba.Inthepresentcaseaccusedno.6Saibabawasarrested
afterfilingofchargesheetagainstaccusedno.1to5inSessionCase
No.13/2014andbythattimenosanctionwasissuedagainstaccused
no.6Saibabaandchargeswereframedagainstaccusednos.1to6at
Exh.66 on 21.2.2013 and the sanction order was issued against
accusedno.6Saibabaisdated6.4.2015(Exh.349)andassuchitisto
beseenwhetherthetrialagainstaccusedno.6Saibabaisvitiatedand
failureofjusticehasbeencausedtotheaccusedno.6Saibaba.

726] It is important to note that as the Sessions Case

No.130/2015andSessionsCaseNo.13/2014arearisingoutofthe
same incident hence my learned predecessor Shri D.R.Shirasao
passed order below Exh.1 on 14.12.2015 in Sessions Case
No.130/2015 for trying both the Sessions Case No.130/2015 and
SessionsCaseNo.13/2014together.Thereafter, theprosecutionhas
filedanapplicationatExh.151inSessionsCaseno.13/2014stating
thatthesupplementarychargesheetwasfiledagainstaccusedno.6
Saibaba subsequent who is arrest and filing of chargesheet in
Sessions Case No.13/2014 and that on 27.10.2015 prosecution
examinedpanchwitnessP.W.no.1SantoshBawneandotherwitnesses
weretobeexaminedandinviewofthatfact,theprosecutionprayed
forrecallingofpanchwitnessP.W.no.1SantoshBawne.Tothesaid
application initially formal objection was taken by Advocate Shri
Gadlingforaccusedon14.12.2015butthereafteraccusedno.1to6
have given no objection for examining panch witness P.W.no.1
Santosh Bawne afresh. Hence this witness was recalled and his
evidencewastakenafresh.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
596 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

727] ItisnecessarytoconsidertheprovisionsofSection465of
theCodeofCriminalProcedurewhichreproducedasunder:

465.Findingorsentencewhenreversiblebyreason
oferror,omissionorirregularity.

(1) Subject to the provisions hereinbefore

contained,nofinding,sentenceororderpassedbya
Courtofcompetentjurisdictionshallbereversedor
altered by a Court of appeal, confirmation or
revision on account of any error, omission or
irregularity in the complaint, summons, warrant,
proclamation,order,judgmentorotherproceedings
before or during trial or in any inquiry or other
proceedings under this Code, or any error, or
irregularity in any sanction for the prosecution,
unless in the opinion of that Court, a failure of
justicehasinfactbeenoccasionedthereby.

(2)Indeterminingwhetheranyerror,omissionor
irregularityin
any proceeding under this Code, or any error, or
irregularityinanysanctionfortheprosecutionhas
occasionedafailureofjustice,theCourtshallhave
regardtothefactwhethertheobjectioncouldand
shouldhavebeenraisedatanearlierstageinthe
proceedings.

728] Ongoingthroughtheaboveprovisionsitisclearthatthe
court was not supposed to stay the proceeding on the ground of
absenceofsanction.

729] Atthisjuncture, itisnecessarytoconsiderobservations

madeinparano.22bytheApexCourtincaseof StateofMadhya
Pradeshv.BhorajiandOrsreportedinJT2001(7)SC55. The
parano.22inthesaidjudgmentisreproducedasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
597 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

22.Thebaragainsttakingcognizanceofcertain
offences or by certain courts cannot govern the
questionwhetherthecourtconcernedisacourt
of competent jurisdiction, e.g. courts are
debarred from taking cognizance of certain
offenceswithoutsanctionofcertainauthorities.If
a court tookcognizance ofsuchoffences,which
werelaterfoundtobewithoutvalidsanction,it
would not become the test or standard for
deciding whether that court was a court of
competentjurisdiction.Itisnowwellsettledthat
ifthequestionofsanctionwasnotraisedatthe
earliestopportunitytheproceedingswouldremain
unaffectedonaccountofwantofsanction.Thisis
another example to show that the condition
precedent for taking cognizance is not the
standard to determine whether the court
concernedisacourtofcompetentjurisdiction.

730] InthecaseofKapbuaiavs.UnionTerritoryofMizoram
reportedin1984CriminalLawJournalNOC189(Gau.),Gauhati
HighCourtobservedasunder:
(B)UnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act(37of
1967) S. 17 Sanction to prosecute Mere
irregularityinsanctionwillnotvitiatetrial.

731] Inthepresentcase,theevidenceofInvestigatingOfficer
P.W.11 Suhas Bawche reveals that he had been to Delhi to arrest
accusedno.6Saibababuthecouldnotarrestaccusedno.6Saibaba
becausehewashighprofileleaderandtill26.2.2014whentheytried
to arrest accused no.6 Saibaba at that time, he called his party
membersandcreatedlawandorderproblemandhence,theycould
notarresthimearlier. Thereafter,SuhasBawche(P.W.11)obtained
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
598 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

permissionandarrestwarrantofaccusedno.6SaibabafromJMFC,
Aherion26.2.2014andthenaccusedno.6cametobearrestedby
InvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawcheandonthesamedayhe
wasremandedtoMCRandthereafterhewassenttojail.Onperusal
offirstsanctionorderissuedbyAmitabhRajan(P.W.19)atExh.17and
Scheduleannexedtheretoitrevealsthattheprimafaciecaseagainst
accusedno.6SaibabawasmadeoutunderSection13,18,20,38,39
r/w120BIPCandinthescheduletheroleofaccusedno.6Saibaba
was mentioned and lastly in the schedule it is mentioned that all
accusedhave committed theofffencepunishableu/s.13,18,20,38
and39ofUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967,(Amendment
2008).

732] TherewasnointentiononthepartoftheGovernmentto
withholdsanctionagainstaccusedno.6Saibababutbecauseofonly
misconception of law in the mind of Sanctioning Authority P.W.19
Amitabh Rajan as accused no.6 Saibaba was not arrested a
subsequent sanction order was issued by P.W.no.18 Kalyaneshwar
BakshiatExh.349.Asdiscussedabove,itisimportanttonotethatas
accusednos.1to6havegivennoobjectiontotheapplicationfiledby
prosecution for recalling panch witness P.W.no.1 Santosh Bawne at
Exh.151, he was recalled and hisevidence wastaken afresh. The
evidenceofall23witnesseswastakeninpresenceofaccusedno.6
Saibaba and the detailed statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. containing 410
questionswereputtohim.Evenassumingforthesakeofargument
thatthesanctionorderwasissuedafterframingofchargebutasthe
evidence of all witnesses was taken in presence of accused no.6
Saibabaandallincriminatingevidencewasputtotheaccusedno.6
Saibabau/s313ofCr.P.C.andeveninviewofprovisionsofsection
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
599 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

464ofCr.P.C.,absenceofsanctionorderbeforeframingofchargeis
also not a ground to vitiate the trial unless failure of justice is
occasioned.

733] Inthepresentcasethereisnothingonrecordtoshowthat
failure of justice was occasioned to accused no.6 Saibaba by not
obtaining sanction order before framing of charge and further no
grievancehasbeenmadebytheaccusedattheearliestopportunity.
Hence,inviewofjudgmentofApexCourtincaseofStateofMadhya
Pradeshv.BhorajiandOrsreportedinJT2001(7)SC55 cited
supra,trialisnotvitiatedonthegroundofproductionofsanction
order subsequently because the role of accused no.6 Saibaba was
already made out in first sanction order issued by P.W.19 Amitabh
Rajanandprimafaciecasewasfoundagainsthimandtherewasno
intention on the part of Government to withhold sanction against
accusedno.6Saibaba,butitwaswithheldonlyonmisconceptionof
lawonthegroundthathewasnotarrestedbythattime.

734] On going through the facts and evidence and legal

position in the present case the prosecution has proved that valid
sanctionwasaccordedinSessionsCaseno.13/2014againstaccused
nos.1to5fortheoffencepunishableunderSections13,18,20,38,
39 of UAPA read with Section 120B of IPC and in Sessions Case
no.130/2015againstaccusedno.6Saibabafortheoffencepunishable
underSections13,18,20,38,39ofUAPAreadwithSection120Bof
IPC.

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
600 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

CONSPIRACYANDUAPA

735] Inthepresentcase,theaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2
PanduNarote,no.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahi,no.5VijayTirki
and no.6 Saibaba have been charged for the offences punishable
undersections13,18,20,38and39UAPAreadwithsection120Bof
I.P.Code. Henceitisnecessarytodiscusslawofconspiracyalong
withtheprovisionsofUAPAtogether.

ArgumentoflearnedSpecialP.P.ShriSathianathanfortheState
onLawofConspiracyandUAPA

736] The learnedSpecialP.P.ShriSathianathan,fortheState

submittedthattheelectronicmaterialcontainedinCDs,DVDs,hard
discs,pendrivesrecoveredfromthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibaba
shows that he is an active member of RDF, which is frontal
organizationofCPI(Maoist)abannedorganizationunderUAPA.He
specifically submitted that the electronic material which is
incriminating and which was supplied by accused no.6 Saibaba to
accused no.3 Hem Mishra was to be supplied to the underground
naxal Narmadakka for creating violence and to advocate, abet or
incitethecommissionofunlawfulactivitiestocreatepublicdisorder
withintentiontothreatentheunity,integrityandsecurityofIndia.
He further submitted that the accused No.1 MaheshTirki, accused
No.2 Pandu Narote and accused No.5 Vijay Tirki were supplying
important information to underground naxal Narmadakka at
Abuzamadandtheywerearrangingmeetingwiththeunderground
naxal persons to support the banned terrorist organization CPI
(Maoist)withintentiontofurtheractivitiesoftheCPI(Maoist).
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
601 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

737] He further submitted that from the transcripts of the

documentsannexedtoCFSLreportExh.267containingthepagesno.
87, 88, 89, 205, 206, 207, 208 shows that accused no.6 Saibaba
wrote letter to his superiors in the name ofPrakash by hiding his
identity. Further he hasalsomadeaPressRelease byhisoriginal
nameG.N.Saibabaatpageno.210ofExh.267whichwasrecovered
fromtheharddisc.Fromthatdocument,itcanbegatheredthathe
isAssistantSecretary ofRDF, whichisfrontalorganizationofCPI
(Maoist)bannedorganizationunderUAPAandfromthedocuments
retrievedfromtheelectronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)i.e. CDs,DVDs,
harddiscs,pendrivesseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
SaibabaunderpanchanamaExh.165i.e.Pagenos.1to247ofCFSL
reportExh.267. Itisclearthattheyarerelatingtomaoistliterature
belonging to Communist Party of India (Maoist) a banned
organization and by which accused used to incite the people to
becomememberofsaidbannedorganizationbyinvolvinginterrorist
act and supporting the ideology of CPI (Maoist) a banned
organization. Those documentswere retrievedfromthe electronic
gadgets recovered from the house of accused no.6 Saibaba under
seizurepanchanamaExh.165andallmaterialwasusedbyaccused
no.6 Saibaba for circulation. He submitted that the documents
(Arts.A17toA21)retrievedfrom16GBmemorycardseizedfromthe
personalsearchofaccusedno.3HemMishra underpanchanamaat
Exh.137showsthedisaffectiontowardsGovernmentofIndiaanda
kindofincitementtothepeopletojointhebannedorganizationCPI
(Maoist) and to create public disorder furthering the terrorist
activitiesbywayofarmedstruggle.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
602 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

738] He submitted that the said electronic material were

handedoverbyaccusedno.6Saibabatoaccusedno.3HemMishrafor
circulation to be given to underground naxal Narmadakka at
AbuzamadandforthatpurposeaccusedHemMishrahadcometo
Aheri and he was arrested there along with accused no.1 Mahesh
Tirki and accused no.2 Pandu Narote. The intention behind the
circulationofsaidnaxalliteratureandletterswastocreateviolence
andincitethepeopleandtospreaddisaffectiontowardsGovernment
establishedbylawandtofurthertheactivitiestocommitoradvocate,
abet or incite the people to create public disorder with intent to
threaten the unity, integrity, security or sovereignty of India and
further to arrange the meetings to work out the strategies to
advocate,propagate,mobilize,inciteandabetpeopleforviolenceby
spreadingdisaffectionagainsttheGovernmentandhenceprovisions
ofSection13and18ofUAPAareattractedagainstaccusednos.1to6.

739] LearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathanfurthersubmittedthat
accusedno.1MaheshTirki,No.2PanduNaroteandaccusedno.3Hem
Mishra were arrested at secluded place at Aheri bus stand and
accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki & No.2 Pandu Narote were knowing
accusedno.3HemMishraandtheyweresentbyabscondingnaxal
accusedNarmadakkatotakeaccusedno.3HemMishratomeether
andthisfactwascorroboratedbytheevidenceofP.W.9RajuPoriya
Atramwhoinhisexaminationstatedthataccusedno.2PanduNarote
tookhimtonaxalNarmadakkaandthereafterNarmadakkahanded
overhimcashamountofRs.5Lacsinthepacketandon2952013he
reachedBallarshaRailwayStationat1000a.m.andthereaftertwo
unknownpersonscamethereandaccusedno.2Panduwenttothem
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
603 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

anddiscussedwiththemandthereafteraccusedno.2Pundutookthe
moneypacketfromhimandgaveittoonepersonoutofthem.

740] LearnedSpl.P.P.Sathainathanfurthersubmittedthatafter
arrest of accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki, no.2 Pandu Narote and no.3
HemMishraatsecludedplaceinsuspiciousconditionnearAheriBus
StandandtheywerebroughttoAheriPoliceStationandfromthe
personalsearchofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiincriminatingarticles
threenaxalpamphletsatArticleNos.139,140and141wereseized
and from the personal search of accused no.2 Pandu Narote
incriminatingarticleslikePlatformticketofBallarsharailwaystation,
LokmatMarathinewspaperandumbrellawereseizedandumbrella
andnewspaperareusedbythemembersofbannedorganisationCPI
(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDFasidentificationcodefor
memberstorecognizetheidentity.Further,thecontentsofpamphlet
(Art.139)issuedbyBhakapa(Maowadi),(GadchiroliDivision)shows
thattherewasopposetotheGovernmentpoliciesimplementedinthe
Gadchirolidistricti.e.implementationofSurjagadProjectandGreen
HuntOperationshowinghatredtowardstheGovernment.Onperusal
ofcontentsofpamphletArt.141itrevealsthatitwaspublishedby
Bhartachi Communist Party (Maowadi), Maharashtra Rajya Samiti
titledas ^jk[k lkaHkkGqu Bsok jk[k >kysY;kaph] laiyh ukgh y<kbZ vtqu
[kSjykathph* andattheenditismentionedthat ^[kSjykath gR;kdkaMkP;k
lq=/kkjkauk ikBh'kh ?kky.kkjs] iksfylka}kjs nfyrkaP;k gR;k dj.kkjs] nfyrkar
ng'kr iljfo.kkjs egkjkV 'kklu eqnkZckn !-- uotuoknh dzkafr f>ankckn*
andappealedpeopletoprotestagainstMaharashtraGovernment.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
604 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

741] HesubmittedthataccusedNo.1MaheshTirkiandaccused
No.2 Pandu Narote were circulating the information to the
undergroundnaxalitesandfoundincitingandabettingthepeoplefor
violencebyspreadingdisaffectionagainsttheGovernment.Fromthe
possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra 16 GB memorycard of
Sandiskcompanycontainingnaxalandmaoistliteratureintheform
oftextwasseized.Fromtheconfessionalstatementsofaccusedno.1
MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteitisclearthattheyhadbeento
Ballarsha Railwaystation for three to four times to receive the
members of banned organisation CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organisationRDFtotakethematAbuzamadforestareatomeetthe
undergroundnaxalsandaccordinglyon22.8.2013accusedno.3Hem
MishraamemberofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontal
organisationRDFcamefromDelhiatBallarsharailwaystationand
accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotetookhimtoAheri.
Thisshowsthataccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteand
no.3 Hem Mishra are active members of banned organisation CPI
(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDF.

742] Hesubmittedthatduringinterrogationwithaccusedno.3
Hem Mishra the involvement of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi was
revealed and on 1.9.2013 when police officers Rajendra Tiwari
(P.W.14)andRameshYede(P.W.8)ofPoliceStation, Chichgad,Dist.
Gondia were patrolling in border area of Chhattisgad near
Rajnandgaon for search of accused Pahadsing who was wanted in
CrimeNo.39/2011ofPoliceStation,Chichgadandatthattimethey
received message on mobile phone that the accused in Crime
no.3017/2013ofPoliceStation,AheriwereinRaipurareaandso,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
605 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

they proceededtoRaipurandtheycametoknowthattheaccused
involved in crime no.3017/2013 had gone towards Devari by four
wheelervehicleandtherefore,theyhadgonetowardsDevariandat
Chichgad Tpoint they found accused no.4 Prashant Rahi and no.5
Vijay Tirki as per the description given to them and hence, they
accostedthemandtookaccusedno.4PrashantRahiandno.5Vijay
TirkitoAheriPoliceStationandhandedovertoP.W.11SDPOBawche
whoarrestedbothaccusedandfromthepossessionofaccusedno.4
PrashantRahieightpapersrelatingMaoistliteraturewerefoundand
thesamewereseizedunderseizurepanchanama(Exh.179)andfrom
possessionofaccusedno.5VijayTirki,thearticleslikepiecesofpaper
(Art.131A to 131D), daily newspaper Dainik Bhaskar dt.1.9.2013
(Art.132) were seized under panchanama (Exh.179). The above
information is admitted under section 27 of Indian Evidence Act
contrarynotclear.

743] Hesubmittedthatduringinterrogationwithaccusedno.3
Hem Mishra and no.4 Prashant Rahi involvement of accused no.6
Saibaba was revealed and Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche
(P.W.11) got search warrant from the Magistrate P.W.12 Nileshwar
Vyas and effected search of the house of accused no.6 Saibaba at
DelhiinpresenceofpanchwitnessJagatBhole(P.W.2)andduringhis
house search extensive electronic gadgets (Arts.1 to 41) like CDs,
DVDs,pendrives,harddiscswereseized.

744] He submitted that from the letter at Art.A21 retrieved

fromthe16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthe
personalsearchofaccusedno.3HemMishraitrevealsthattwoyoung
persons who are young amongst themwould come andthose two
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
606 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

personsare accusedno.3HemMishraandno.4PrashantRahiand
accusedno.3HemMishrawascirculatingthesaiddocumentstothe
undergroundnaxalsandaccusedno.5VijayTirkihadcometoreceive
accusedno.4PrashantRahitomeettheundergroundnaxalRamdar
andfromthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.5VijayTirkiincriminating
article newspaper Dainik Bhaskar which is used by naxals as
identificationcode.

745] Hefurthersubmittedthatfindingofseveraldocuments,
photographs, videoclips in the harddiscs seized from the house
search of accused no.6 Saibaba and from the CDR of mobile SIM
cards of accused no.3 Hem Mishra, no.4 Prashant Rahi and no.6
Saibabaprosecutionhasestablishedthelinkbetweenaccusednos.1
to6anditshowsthattheywereincontactwitheachother.

746] He submitted that from the confessional statements of

accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroterecordedbythe
MagistrateP.W.12NileshwarVyas,itrevealsthataccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote at the instance of lady naxal
NarmadakkahadbeentoBallarshaRailwaystationtoreceiveaccused
no.3HemMishraandthereaftertheywerefoundtakinghimtoforest
areainGadchirolidistricttomeetundergroundnaxalsandtheywere
arrestednearAheribusstand.Hesubmittedthataccusedno.5Vijay
Tirki had come to receive accused no.4 Prashant Rahi at Devri
ChichgadTpointfortakinghimtomeetundergroundnaxalRamdar
andtheybothwerearrestedatDevriChichgadTpoint. Thisshows
that accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki, no.2 Pandu Narote, no.3 Hem
Mishra, no.4 Prashant Rahi, no.5 Vijay Tirki and no.6 Saibaba
have100%conspiredwitheachotherandtheobjectofconspiracyis
proved.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
607 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

747] ThelearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathansubmittedthatin
order to establish the link of all the accused with each other
prosecutionmainlyreliedonfollowingdocuments:

1] Inordertoprovethataccusedno.6Saibabais
using pseudo name Prakash and he made
correspondence with Comrades of CPI (Maoist),
prosecutionhasreliedondocumentatpageno.17of
Exh.267inwhichitismentionedthatPrakashfailed
to finalise the draft of programme and when the
draft almost finalised the hard disk of Prakash's
computergotcrashedandinCFSLreport(Exh.267)
onthelastpageitismentionedthattheharddiscin
Ex.1 could not be detected in the Cyber Forensic
Scientific Laboratory and hence data could not be
retrievedfromtheharddiscandthesaidharddiscis
the same as referred at page no.17 of Exh.267.
Hence, it is clear that said crashed harddisc was
sent to CFSL Bombay alongwith other electronic
devices(Art.1to41)anditcouldnotbeopenedin
the Cyber Forensic Scientific Laboratory. Hence, it
reveals that the name Prakash mentioned in the
Secretary's report at page no.17 of Exh.267 is
nothingbutaccusedno.6Saibabaandfurtheritis
admitted by P.W.6 Atul Avhad in Maoist group
membershasaliasnameandtheynormallyusealias
name.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
608 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

2] FromArticleA21ofExh.266foundin16
GB memorycard ofSandiskCompanyseizedfrom
the possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra it
revealsthataccusedno.6Saibabaistheimportant
link between the Indian banned organization CPI
(Maoist) and international fraternal organizations
which are working under the guidance and
directionsofCPI(Maoist),Indiaandheisplayinga
pivotal role for strengthening the organizations
working under CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organizationsRDF.Thishasrelationwithdocument
at page no.1 of Exh.267 found in the harddisk
(Exh.4) seized from the house search of accused
no.6SaibabaunderseizurepanchanamaExh.165.

3] From the document at page no.86 of

Exh.267 which is a document addressed to Dear
Comrade Arman by accused no.6 Saibaba by his
pseudo name as Prakash in which he lastly
suggested to develop the antiimperialist forces to
themaximumpossibleandfurtherstatedthattheir
strength is no doubt limited but focus it in a
directiontogivemaximumresults.

4] From document at page no.78 of

Exh.267 having path Exh.4/OLD EHD/OLD/All

12345/ILPS/DearArman,Exh.267whichisaletter
writtentoDearArmanwhereinitismentionedthat
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
609 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

international organizations are working at the

instanceofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)andits
frontalorganizationRDF.

5] A document at page no.81 of Exh.267

having path Exh.4/All old and new/others

/international/dear GNSaibaba addressed to

accusedno.6SaibababyUfukBerdam,Chairperson
of the International Relation Commission ATIK
shows the international relationship with
CPI(Maoist)inforeignofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

6] A document at page no.92 of Exh.267

havingpathExh.4/OLDEHD/Allothers2/Arrange

/Azadmatter/Communist/Movementiswrittenby
Communist Party MaoistItaly, Communist Party
MaoistFrance and Communist Party MaoistTurkey
NorthKurdistanshowstheinternationalrelationship
ofCPI(Maoist)India.

7] AdocumentatPageno.224ofExh.267
having path Ex4/C/Ritu 13 March/my
documents/open letter.final Jul.A09 is a Open
Letter addressed to Dear Comarade from the
Communist Party of India (Maoist) and from this
letter it shows that there was correspondence in
betweenCentralCommitteeCPI(Maoist)Indiaand
CommunistPartyNepal(Maoist).
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
610 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

8] From the document at Page no.10 of

Exh.267 titled as CPBhutan (MLM) Bikalp it is
clear that there were correspondence with
CommunistPartyBhutan(Maoist)byCPI(Maoist),
India.

9] Fromthedocumentsatpageno.137and
139ofExh.267undertheletterheadOfficeofthe
Prime Minister Transnational Government of
TamilEelam,875AvenueoftheAmericas,Suite,
NewYork,USAfoundintheharddiscseizedfrom
thehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabashowsthe
international connection and link between
Comrades of CPI (Maoist) of international
organizationswithCPI(Maoist).

10] The document at page no.208 of

Exh.267 addressed to Dear Comrades written by
accusedno.6SaibababypseudonamePrakashin
which accused no.6 Saibaba was given
responsibilitiesofDelhiandNorthIndia.

11] In the document at page no.119 of

Exh.267andon9thpageofthisdocumentstrategy
ofMaoistandinterviewwithaccusedno.6Saibaba
ismentioned.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
611 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

12] ThedocumenttitledasDraftManifesto
ofRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)atArt.
159 having path ex. 4/31.12.12/RDF Conference

material/DRAFT MANIFESTO OF RDF

amendedbyconference andatpageno.10ofthis
documentAimsandTasksofRDFweregiven.

13] The document Art.147 having path

Exh23/ALLL/Accommodation issues/Letters/
lettertoSaibabawrittenbyoneSurendraMohanto
accusedno.6Saibabainwhichitismentionedthat
hecannotbepartoftheCPI(Maoist)program,ashe
neversubscribedtoviolentresistance.

748] ThelearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathanhasreliedonthe
followingphotographstoprovetheconspiracyagainstaccusedNo.3,
4&6:

1] Inthephotographatpageno.148ofExh.267
accusedno.6SaibabaisseenwithPrachanda,the
leaderofCPI(Maoist)Nepal.

2] Inthephotographatpageno.150ofExh.267
Prachandaisseenwithaccusedno.6Saibaba.

3] Inaphotographatpageno.143accusedno.6
Saibabaisseenonleftsideofthedaisalongwith
othereightpersons.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
612 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

4] In a photograph at page no.144 of Exh.267

bannerofKrantikariJanwadiMorchaisappearing
and in the said programme accused no.3 Hem
Mishra is standing on the stage addressing to
people and accused no.6 Saibaba is seen on the
rightsideofthestage.

5] In a photograph at page no.135 of Exh.267

accusedno.6Saibabaisseenaddressingfromstage
underthebannerofTheUnspokenGenocide:War
crimesinSrilanka.

6] Ina photograph at pageno.143ofExh.267

accused no.6 Saibaba is seen in public meeting
under the banner of STOP THE WAR OF
GENOCIDEOFTAMILSINSRILANKA,heldatNew
Delhi.

7] In a photograph at page no.160 of Exh.267

whereinaccusedno.6Saibabaisseenonstage.

8] In a photograph at page no.158 of Exh.267

accusedno.3HemMishraisseen.

9] In a photograph at page no.38 of Exh.267

accused no.3 Hem Mishra is seen singing a song
withDafli.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
613 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

10] Inaphotograph at pageno.152ofExh.267

accused no.6 Saibaba is seen alongwith Nepal
MaoistleaderRonaWilson.

11] In a photograph at page no.150 of Exh.267
accusedno.6SaibabaisseenwithMaoistleadersof
Nepal i.e. Baburam Bhattarai and Nepal Maoist
leaderPrachanda.

12] Inaphotographatpageno.148accusedno.6
Saibaba is seen with Nepal Maoist leader
Prachanda.

13] Inaphotographatpageno.147accusedno.6
Saibaba is seen addressing the public meeting
underthebannerofStopArmyEncroachmentIn
Bastar!.

749] ThelearnedSpl.P.P.ShriSathainathanhasrelied onthe

followingvideoclipsfoundinelectronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)seized
from the house search of accused no.6 Saibaba under seizure
panchanama Exh.165 in which the accused no.3 Hem Mishra and
accusedno.4PrashantRahiwereseen.Theyareasunder:

1] In videoclip having path Exh.7/Exh.71/

(1)DVD/ 091204/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1 accused
no.3 Hem Mishra is seen in the audience of the
meetingforConventionagainstWaronPeopleheld
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
614 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

at New Delhi on 4th December 2009 by Forum

AgainstWaronPeopleandaccusedno.6Saibabais
satonthedais.

2] In videoclip having path Exh.3/films/s1/

RDF/2/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1, accused no.6
Saibabaandaccusedno.4 Prashant Rahiisfound
sittingintheaudiencewhereoneladyisshouting
slogans demanding return of Army from Kashmir
andforliberationofKashmir.

750] Findingof abovevideoclipsandphotographsfound in

theharddiscofaccusedno.6Saibaba,itisclearthataccusedno.3
HemMishra,accusedno.4PrashantRahiandaccusedno.6Saibaba
werehavingrelationsamongstthem.

751] He submitted that in the present case there are six

arrestedaccusedandthreeabscondingaccusedbynameladynaxal
Narmadakka,RamdarandRajeshandtheevidenceintotalityclearly
established that there was conspiracy between accused nos.1 to 6
alongwith absconding accused which clearly shows from the
documentscontainedinelectronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)seizedfrom
thepossessionofaccusedno.6Saibabaand16GBmemorycardfrom
the possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra and three pamphlets
seizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandthedaily
newspaperDainikBhaskarseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.2
Pandu Narote and accused no.5 Vijay Tirki and the documents 8
pagesatArt.130Afoundinpossessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
615 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

He submitted that the confessional statements of accused no.1

MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteclearlydemonstratetheroleof
abscondingladynaxalleaderNarmadakka,RamdarandRajesh.He
submitted that since 1996accusedno.6Saibaba,jointSecretaryof
AIPRFwasactivememberofbannedorganizationandfromtimeto
timebannedorganisationsmergedintootherorganizationsRDFand
hatched conspiracy with Raj Kishor, Secretary of SFPR and
subsequentlyfromtimetotimewithotherorganisationsandaccused
No.1to6.

752] He submittedthatconsideringthehugeelectronicmaterial
regardingtheprogrammes,pamphlets,correspondence,agenda,audio
and video clips of such banned organization of terrorists gang and
arrangingthemeetingsandsupportingtheideologyofCPI(Maoist)a
banned organization clearly shows that accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki,
accused no.2 Pandu Narote, accused no.3 Hem Mishra, accused no.4
PrashantRahi,accusedno.5VijayTirkiandaccusedno.6Saibabawere
theactivemembersofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontal
organizationRDF. Hence,considering thefactsandcircumstancesof
the case it is clear that all the accused nos.1 to 6 were found in
contactwitheachotherandtheycommittedcriminalconspiracyand
committedtheoffencespunishableu/s13,18,20,38and39ofUAPA
readwithSection120BofIPCandhenceheprayedforconvictionof
accusedNo.1to6.

753] In support of his submission he placed reliance on the

judgment of Apex Court in case of Vijayan v. State of Kerala
reportedin1999SupremeCourtCases(Cri)378whereinitisheld
that
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
616 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

F. Penal Code, 1860 Ss. 120B and 302

CriminalconspiracyProsecutionmustestablisha
connectionbetweenallegedconspiracyandactdone
pursuanttothesaidconspiracy.

ArgumentofAdvocateShriGadlingfortheaccusedonLawof
ConspiracyandUAPA

754] Percontra,thelearnedAdvocateShriGadlingforaccused
submitted that for the application of Section 20 of UAPA it is not
sufficientthatorganisationistobedeclaredasTerroristOrganisation
butithastobeprovedbytheprosecutionthatthesaidorganisationis
involvedinterroristact.Thereisnooralordocumentaryevidenceon
recordtoshowthattheCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDF
areaterroristorganisationandbarereadingofSection20ofUAPA
revealsthatmeremembershipofbannedorganisationisnotsufficient
unless it is proved that organisation is involved in terrorist act as
definedunderSection15ofUAPA.Hesubmittedthatevenassuming
for the sake of argument that accused are connected with CPI
(Maoist)organisationstillprosecutionhasnotadducedanyoralor
documentaryevidenceshowingthatCPI(Maoist)andRDFisinvolved
inanysortofterroristactivities.

755] He submitted that provisions of TADA and POTA

(repealed)areinparamateriawithprovisionsofUAPAsincerepeated
andtheobservationsofApexCourtwhiledecidingcaseisunderTADA
isallverymuchapplicabletodecidethecaseunderUAPA.Insupport
ofhissubmissionheplacedrelianceonthecaseofKalpnathRaivs.
Statereportedin(1997)8SupremeCourtCases732whereinitis
observedthat
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
617 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

A. Terrorist and Disruptive Activities

(Prevention)Act,1987S.3(5)(asinsertedbyAct
43 of 1993), S. 3(1), (2) and (3) Essential
requirementsofS.3(5)Expressionterroristactin
S.3(5)MeaningofHeld,includesconspiracyto
committerroristactorabetment,incitement,etc.of
such acts Acts enumerated in subsection (3)
cannot be delinked from those specified in sub
section(1)Inabsenceofanyevidencetoshowthat
terrorist gang of which accused were members
committedanyterroristactaftercommencementof
amended Act 43 of 1993 conviction cannot be
sustained.

There are two postulates in subsection (5).

Firstisthattheaccusedshouldhavebeenamember
ofaterroristsgangof'terrorists'organisationafter
23.5.1993. Second is that the said gang or
organizationshouldhavebeeninvolvedinterrorist
acts subsequent to 23.5.1993. Unless both
postulatesexisttogetherSection3(5)cannotbeused
againstanyperson.

It would be illogical to delink the acts

enumeratedinsubsection(3)fromthosespecified
insubsection(1)forthepurposeofunderstanding
the meaning of terrorist act indicated in Section
3(5).

756] He submittedthat amendment toSection 15and16of

UAPAwereeffectedintheyear2008,theprosecutionhastoprove
thatafteramendmentintheyear2008theaccusedarethemembers
ofbannedterroristorganisationanditisnotsufficienttoprovethat
sometimesinpastaccusedweremembersofbannedorganisationi.e.
beforetheamendmentintheyear2008.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
618 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Conclusion
onLawofConspiracyandUAPA

757] The accused Nos.1 to 6 being the members of banned

terroristorganizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF
hatchedcriminalconspiracyandtheobjectofthesaidconspiracywas
tocreateviolence,tocausepublicdisorderandtospreaddisaffection
towardstheCentralGovernmentandtheStateGovernmentandin
pursuance of the saidcriminalconspiracyaccusednos.1to 6 were
foundinpossessionofprintednaxalliterature,circulatinginformation
whichispromotionalliteratureofterroristorganizationintheformof
booklets, pamphlets, correspondence, writings, reports of the
meetings,letters,emails,speechesinaudio,videoandtextformats
contained in electronic gadgets like CDs, DVDs, pendrives, hard
discs, memorycards and found using the same for circulation
amongstthemembersofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)andits
frontalorganisationRDFandotherpersonsforcreatingviolenceand
causingpublicdisorder.

758] Inordertoprovetheconspiracybetweenaccusedpersons
fortheoffencepunishableundersections13,18,20,38and39of
UAPAreadwithSection120BofIPCprosecutionhasreliedonseveral
text documents, videoclips and photographs seized from house
searchofaccusedno.6SaibabaandnaxalpamphletsArts.no.139to
141seizedfromthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,
eight papers relating to naxal literature seized from the personal
searchofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiatExh.130AandArts.A17to
A21textdocumentsfoundinthe16GBmemorycardseizedfromthe
personalsearchofaccusedno.3HemMishra.Inordertodetermine
theactofeachaccusedintheconspiracyitisnecessarytoseewhat
role is played by each accused while carrying out the object of
conspiracy.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
619 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Roleofaccusedno.6Saibaba

759] Duringinterrogationwithaccusedno.3HemMishraand
accusedno.4PrashantRahi,theinvolvementofaccusedno.6Saibaba
was revealed and thereafter Investigating Officer Suhas Bawche
(P.W.21)soughtpermissionfromJMFCAheriVyas(P.W.12)fortaking
housesearchofaccusedno.6SaibabaatDelhiandaftertakingthe
permission he alongwith Maharashtra police went to Delhi on
12.9.2013 and with the help of police staff of Moris Nagar Police
StationatDelhiandinpresenceofpanchwitnessJagatBhole(P.W.2)
searchofthehouseofaccusedno.6Saibabawasconductedandfrom
hishousesearchextensiveelectronicgadgetsCDs,DVDs,pendrives,
memory cards, harddiscs (Art no.1 to 41) and other articles like
magazine Janapratirodh, one printout, photograph of lady naxal
withgun,bookbynamePrashembabuMaowadiNahiHain,booklet
with title People's Hero Comrade Kishanji, one magazine The
arrestedregardingbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontal
organizationRDFwereseizedunderpanchanamaatExh.165.

Accusedno.6SaibabaisfounderofRDF.

760] Following are the text documents, videoclips and

photographsfoundintheelectronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)CDs,DVDs,
pendrives,harddiscsseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
SaibabaunderseizurepanchanamaExh.165,whichshowtheroleof
accusedno.6Saibaba.ThetextdocumentswereretrievedbyCFSL,
Bombay and the text documents contain 247 pages. Those were
certifiedbyCFSL,MumbaiandfiledalongwithCFSLreportExh.267.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
620 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ThetextdocumentsArts.A17toA21retrievedandcertifiedbyCFSL,
MumbaiarefiledvideCFSLreportExh.266,furtheratthetimeof
recordingstatementofaccusedu/s313ofCr.P.C.thetextdocuments
not forming part of pages 247 were shown to accused no.3 Hem
Mishra, no.4PrashantRahiandno.6Saibabaonthelaptopofthe
Court and those were compared from the soft copies supplied to
defence displayed on their laptop and as per the application of
defenceatExh.246printoutsofthosedocumentsweretakenandone
copyofeachdocumentwasgiventothedefenceandtheprosecution.
ThesedocumentsareatArts.147to164:

1] Article 157 having path ex.

4/31.12.12/rdfpdfi/resolution/
ECResolutions/JointMeetingofAIPRF and SFPR
200505_ Modified titled as Joint Meeting of
AIPRF and SFPR. In the said document it is
mentionedthataccusedno.6Saibabaattendedthe
meeting as a Secretary of AIPRF alongwith Raj
Kishore,SecretaryofSFPRandinthesaidmeeting
asperResolution1itwasresolvedtounifyAIPRF
andSFPRintooneorganisationwithanewname
Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) andRDF
shall work with slogans like Naxalbary Ekhi
Rastha, Andhra Bihar, Jharkhand Chattisgah
Dikhata hain Rastha and thereby merged AIPRF
and SFPR into Revolutionary Democratic Front
(RDF) and to that effect press conference was
conductedbyaccusedno.6SaibabaandRajkishore
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
621 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

whoweretheSecretariesofbothAIPRFandSFPR.
Further it is mentioned in this document that
Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) accepted
theideologyofCPI(Maoist) andthereareseveral
letters found in the electronic gadgets 16 GB
memorycardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthe
possessionofaccusedno.3HemMishraandArts.1
to41CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddiscsseizedfrom
thehousesearchofaccusedno.6SAibabawritten
bythemembersofCPI(Maoist)totheircomrades.

2] Thedocumentatpageno.1ofExh.267having
path Exh4/rdf/june 2012/conference
material/RDFfirstconference/Secretary'sreport
final unamended titled as Revolutionary
DemocraticFront(RDF) FirstConferenceofthe
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)dated22
23 April, Sundaraiya Veigyan Bhavan,
Hyderabad, Telangana addressed to Comrades
and Friends starting the word 'Red salute' to all
delegatesinwhichitismentionedthatin2005two
organizations i.e. All India Peoples' Resistance
Forum (AIPRF)andStrugglingForumforPeoples'
Resistance (SFPR) merged into Revolutionary
Democratic Front (RDF) which was declared on
23rdMay(NaxalbariDay)inaPressConferencein
Delhianditisfurthermentionedinthisdocument
thatInthecurrentperiodofworldeconomiccrisis
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
622 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

and the political turmoil, the political and

organizationalresponsibilitiesofRDFhavebecome
evenmoreimportant.In2005,keepinginmindthe
existent economic, political and social conditions
and after analyzing the material condition of the
antiimperialist antifeudal mass movements, the
two organizations All India Peoples Resistance
Forum (AIPRF) andStrugglingForumforPeoples
Resistance (SFPR) merged to form Revolutionary
DemocraticFront(RDF).

3] Thereisphotographofaccusedno.6Saibaba
appearing in the conference dated 2223 April
having path Exh.3/new folder(2)/
allmetters1/photos/rdfconvention at Sr.No.
DSC0653 at page no.33 of Exh.267 in which
accused no.6 Saibaba is seen addressing to the
people under the banner of Revolutionary
DemocraticFront(RDF),AllIndiaFirstConference
22, 23 April 2012 held at Sundarayya Vignana
BhavanatHyderabad,Telangana andbelowthat
Turn the prevailing world economic crisis into
revolutionary crisis, Stop operation green hunt.
WithdrawthearmedforcesfromBastariswritten.
Fromthis,itisclearthataccusedno.6Saibabais
thefoundermemberofRDF.

4] There is videoclip having path

Exh.3/films/S1/RDF/1/ video_TS, VTS _01_1
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
623 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

whichwasseizedfromthehouseofaccusedno.6
Saibaba underpanchanamaExh.165inwhichthe
venueandstageof1stconfrenceofRDFisshownin
which one banner is seen having contents STOP
OPERATION GREEN HUNT RDF WITHDRAW
THE ARMED FORCES FROM BASTAR, ON THE
GATE BANNER IT IS WRITTEN REVOLUTIONARY
DEMOCRATIC FRONT(RDF) ALL INDIA1ST
CONFERENCE 2223 APRIL 2012 HYDERABAD
TELANGANA, and the banners showing the
contents SHAHID COMRADE NAGINAMAJHEE
MANCH, and in the said videoclip accused no.6
Saibabaisseenenteringthevenueamidstbeatsof
drums.

5] There is a document at page no.210 of

Exh.267titledasRevolutionaryDemocraticFront
(RDF),TheFirstAllIndiaConference.Itis'press
release' dated 23 April 2012. The address of
conference mentioned in the document is
Sundarayya Vignana Bhavan at Hyderabad,
Telangana and it was written by accused no.6
SaibabainthecapacityofDeputySecretaryofRDF,
afrontalorganisationofCPI(Maoist).

761] Theaccusedno.6SaibabawasinitiallyactingasAssistant
SecretaryofRDFandthisfactisreflectedinthedocumentatArt.157
titledasJointMeetingofAIPRFandSFPRanditisclearfromthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
624 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Resolutionno.2ofthesaiddocumentthattheaccusedno.6Saibaba
wasdeclaredasaAssistantSecretaryofRDF.

762] Thereafter accused no.6 Saibaba was acting as Deputy

SecretaryofRDFandthisfactisclearfromthefollowingdocuments

1] Fromthedocumentatpageno.119ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisc Exh.4 having path
Exh.4/OLDEHD/OLD/All12345 titledasMaoist
StrategyinIndiawithSubtitleAninterviewwith
G.N.Saibaba, it is clear that accused no.6 G.N.
Saibabaisdesignatedasthedeputysecretaryofthe
Revolutionary Democratic Front, an all Indian
Federationofrevolutionaryorganizations.

2] Thedocumentatpageno.210ofExh.267titled
as Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF), The
FirstAllIndiaConferenceisaPressReleasedated
23April2012heldatHyderabad,Telanganainpara
2ofthedocumentitismentionedthataccusedno.6
Saibaba is a Deputy Secretary of RDF, which is a
frontalorganisationofCPI(Maoist).

763] Thereafteraccusedno.6SaibabawasdesignatedasJoint
SecretaryofRDFandtothateffectitisnecessarytolookhaveonthe
followingvideos
1] Fromthe videoclip havingpath Exh.3/RDFConference
video/9DVD/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_4, it is seen that comrade
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
625 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

RajkishoreisseendeclaringnewofficebearersoftheRDFandfurther
comrade Varavarara's declared as a President, comrade
Ghantiprasadam as a Vice President and accused no.6 Saibaba is
declared as a JointSecretary alongwithcomradeJeetanMarandi
who was in jail, further Rajkishore declared Comrade Ajay as a
TreasurerofRDF.

764] Thedocument atpageno.41ofExh.267havingpath

Exh.4/Oct.2010/people res/material on JP/interview with G.N.
Saibaba is an interview of accused no.6 Saibaba. From this
document it is clear that accused no.6 Saibaba has given said
interview in the capacity of VicePresident of Revolutionary
Democratic Front on the Revolutionary and Democratic
MovementsinIndiabyKaFranka.

765] In the videoclip having path Exh.3/RDF Conference

video/9DVD/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3,accusedno.6Saibabawasseen
onRDF'sfirstconferencestageandrequestingRajkishoretodeclare
the new panel of RDFandRajkishore declaresthe new panel and
calleduponallthemembersondaisandthesememberswerefifteen
innumbersstandingandholdingandraisingtheirhandstowardsthe
audiencealongwithaccusedno.6Saibaba,oneofthepanelmember.

Accusedno.6SaibabahasdraftedtheconstitutionofRDF

766] Theaccusedno.6SaibabahasdraftedconstitutionofRDF
andthisfactisclearfromthedocumentatArticle159havingpath
ex.4/31.12.12/RDFConferencematerial/DRAFTMANIFESTO OF
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
626 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

RDFamendedbyconference.Fromthisdocumentitisclearthatit
isareviseddraftasperECsuggestionstitledas,DraftManifestoof
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)anditisclearthataccused
no.6SaibabaprepareddraftmanifestoofRDFand heisfounderof
RDFandthisfactisalsoclearfromthedocumentatpageno.17of
Exh.267andfromthedocumentatpageno.17ofExh.267takenout
from the hard disc Exh.4 having path Exh.22/recovered
folder/folder 003/Secretary's report, titled as Secretary's report
regarding review of RDF work since its formation it shows that
responsibilityofpreparationofdraftmanifestowasgiventoaccused
no.6Saibababa.

Prakashisnothingbutaccusedno.6Saibaba

767] Following are the documents showing that Prakash is

nothingbutaccusedno.6Saibaba

1] The document at page no.17 of Exh.267

taken out from the hard disc Exh.4 having path
Exh.22/recovered folder/folder 003/Secretary's
report, titled as Secretary's report regarding
review of RDF work since its formation shows
thatresponsibilityofpreparationofdraftmanifesto
was given to accused no.6 Saibababa and the
contentsofthesamearereproducedasunder
Prakash failed to finalise the programme and
constitution of A4 by incorporating amendments
accepted in the conference. The inordinate delay
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
627 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

hadhappenedbecauseofseveralreasons.Firstofall
hemadeseveralrevisionsofthedraftwiththehelp
ofTM/BDSandRR.Thistookalotoftime.After
thiswhenthedraftalmostfinalised,theharddiskof
Prakashs computer got crashed. He made several
effortstoretrievethedatabutcouldntretrieveit.
Mean while Prakash was not well and he faced
several problems. comrade Jaddu advised Prakash
toredothefinalisationofthedraftwithouthanding
overthisworktoanyoneelse.Prakashtriedtodo
the work but couldnt complete it. According to
prosecution four harddiscs were seized from the
house search of accused no.6 Saibaba and those
weresenttoCFSL,Mumbaiforexamination.CFSL,
Mumbai examined the same and one harddisc
could not be detected. This fact is mentioned in
CFSL,reportExh.267.Theharddiscwhichwasnot
detectedisthesameofwhichreferencehascomein
documentatPageno.17ofExh.267.

2] From the letter (Art.A21) of Exh.266

addressedtoComradebyoneJadduandPrakash
dated 1st August 2013 it is clear that demand of
fund of Rs.2 Lacs was made for meeting the
expensesofbannedorganisationandthesaidletter
was written by Jaddu and Prakash to Dear
Comrades.AsdiscussedabovePrakashisnothing
but accused no.6 Saibaba and the said text
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
628 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

document was found in the 16 GB memorycard

seized from personal search of accused no.3 Hem
MishravidepanchanamaExh.137.

3] Theletteratpageno.206ofExh.267takenout
from the harddisc Exh.4 having path
Exh.4/Data/personal addressed toSecretarySub
CommitteeonMassOrganization(SUCOMO)CPI
(Maoist) written by Prakash dated 2 December
2006, inwhich itismentionedthataccusedno.6
SaibabahasbeenservingontheallIndiaFraction
Committee under the Subcommittee on Mass
Organization (SUCOMO) under the Central
CommitteeofthePartysince1996andheisdeeply
paintedbythetreatmentmetedouttowardshimby
somecomradesalltheseyearsandhefindshimself
in a more aggravated situation and not in a
psychological condition to bear the situation. His
health is also not cooperating to face the present
aggressiveattitudeofthesecomradestowardshim
and therefore, he submitted his resignation of his
primary membership of the party and to the
Fraction Committee andhe also resignedfrom all
thecommitteesoftheMassFrontswhereverhewas
amember.Lastly,heofferedapologyfortakingthis
decisionatatimewhenheshouldhavebeendoing
more quality work in building the mass work
entrusted with by the Party. His decision of
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
629 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

resignation to the Party membership and all Mass

Fronts is final and nonnegotiable and he would
soon submit adetailed letter ofresignation. This
showsthatitisaresignationletterbyaccusedno.6
SaibabaanditbearshispseudonamePrakashand
hisphysicalconditionisreflectedinthesaidletter.

4] Further Prakash is nothing but accused no.6

Saibaba is crystal clear from the wording of the
document at page no.208of Exh.267 havingpath
Ex4/Cy47513Ex4/c/Allother whichisaletter
addressed to Dear Comrades by Prakash (i.e.
accused no.6 Saibaba) in which it is mentioned
thatbecauseofhandicapnessaccusedno.6Saibaba
isunsuitablefortheworkoforganization.

5] InthedocumentatArticle150retrievedfrom
the harddiscs seized from the house search of
accusedno.6Saibabawhichwaswrittenbyaccused
no.6SaibabaaddressedtoProfessorAnandkrishnan
showsthathe(accusedno.6Saibaba)wasphysically
handicappedpersonwithaseveredeformity(90%)
andhisbothlowerlimbswereaffectedbypolioin
hischildhoodandhecannotstandorwalkonhis
ownandhemoveinawheelchair.

6] From the documents having path

Exh.5/Saibaba/accommodation issue 2013/
Manjeerapassport,PHCertificate retrievedfrom
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
630 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

the harddiscs seized from the house search of

accused no.6 Saibaba it shows that in these
documentstheIdentitycardofSt.XavioursSenior
Secondary School, 4, Rajnivas Marg, Delhi of
G.Manjeera and her parent's name is Mr. G.N.
Saibaba (Accused no.6 Saibaba) and Mrs. A.S.
Vasanta(wifeofaccusedno.6Saibaba)arewritten,
also certificate for physically handicapped person
issued by All India Medical Sciences, New Delhi,
DepartmentofPhysicalMedicineandRehabilitation
on 09/07/2003 in the name of accused no.6
Saibabaisseen.

768] Itisalsothedefenceoftheaccusedthateverymemberof
CPI(Maoist)grouphasaliasname.Tothateffectsuggestionwasalso
giventotheinformantP.W.6AtulAvhadinhiscrossexaminationand
headmittedthateverymemberofCPI(Maoist)grouphasaliasname
andtheynormallyusedtheiraliasname.

769] Hence,itisclearthataccusedno.6Saibabawasusinghis
pseudo name as Prakash in his letter correspondence to the
Comrades of banned organisation CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organisationRDFandhencethecontentionofthedefencethatthe
letterswritteninthenameofPrakashwerenotwrittenbyaccused
no.6Saibabacannotbeaccepted.

Followingaretheincriminatingdocumentsfoundinelectronic
gadgets(Arts.1to41)seizedfromthehousesearchofaccused
no.6SaibabashowinghisactivitiesinRDF
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
631 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1] AdocumentatPageno.41ofExh.267having
path Exh.4/Oct.2010/people res/material on

JP/interviewwithG.N.Saibabaisan Interviewof
accused no.6 Saibaba, VicePresident of
Revolutionary Democratic Front on the
Revolutionary and Democratic Movements in
India byKaFrankinwhichaccusedno.6Saibaba
statedthathestartedworkinginanantiimperialist
organizationformedattheallIndialevelcalledAll
India Peoples' Resistance Forum (AIPRF) and the
AIPRF in 2005 merged with other similar
organizations to form Revolutionary Democratic
Front(RDF)anditsmembersarebeingbrandedas
havinglinkswithCPI(Maoist)justbecauseitalso
believes in revolutionary transformation of Indian
Society. Hundredsofitsfunctionarieseithersuffer
in prisonsorworkindifferentforms. Hefurther
stated regarding the fact of strengthening and
expanding the party and to struggle against
repression in developing campaigns and unlawful
organization and lastly to support all anti
imperialist struggles and peoples' wars on the
internationallevel.Herepliedtooneofthequestion
thattheRDFbelievesthatmilitantmobilizationof
basic classes of the people is the only way to
democratizetheSouthAsianSubcontinentandRDF
also involves in building and participating in the
larger United Fronts of different democratic and
antiimperialist forces in the country. From this
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
632 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

documentitisclearthataccusedno.6Saibabaisthe
founder member of RDF, frontal organization of
bannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)andhehaslink
withCPI(Maoist).

2] In another interview at page no.119 of

Exh.267takenoutfromtheharddiscExh.4having
path Exh.4/OLD EHD/OLD/All 12345 titled as
Maoist Strategy in India with Sub title An
interview with G.N.Saibaba, accused no.6
Saibabastatedthat heisthe deputysecretary of
the Revolutionary Democratic Front,an all Indian
Federation of revolutionary organizations and
furtherstatedthattheMaoistarefollowingthenew
democratic method proved by China under the
leadershipofMaothattherevolutionarymovements
mustputpriorityonworkingintheareaswherethe
stateisweak. TheMaoistsworkinthebackward
regionstosmashthelocalgovernmentandestablish
people'spower.Theybuildbasesinthesebackward
areas.Thisdoesn'tmeanthattheydon'talsowork
in the cities. In fact, in the party congress in
January/February 2007 they decided to increase
theirworkintheurbanareas.Theyhaveproduced
a new document concerning work in the urban
areas that analyses the work done the last thirty
years. This document sets out a strategy for
developingtheworkintheurbanareas.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
633 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

770] Inthesaidinterviewaccusedno.6Saibabasaidthatthe
Maoistsdoworkintheurbanareasamongtheworkingclassesand
the middle classes. This has secondary importance. The primary
importance is to capture the villages first and develop the armed
struggle withpeasantsasthemainforceandwiththeworkingclass
astheleadership.Thismeansnotjustthephysicalworkersbutthose
ofthepeoplethathavetheproletarianideologyandwithoutproperly
oftheirownMaoistsdocombinelegalandtheillegalstrugglesasfar
asthereisspaceinlegalmeansavailable.Whateverlittlelegalspace
there is, it's being used to the maximum extent possible. But the
ruling classes don't allow thee use legal means and different
institutionsofdemocracy. Participatinginelectionsisnottheonly
way to participate in legal and urban spaces. Even boycotting
elections is a highly political activity, which is another way of
participatingpoliticallywithinthegivendemocraticspacethatexists
inIndia.FirstofalltheMaoistsareconcentratingongainingpower
forthepeopletobuildpeople'sdemocraticrevolutionaryinstitutions.
Whenthisisachievedinlargeareastheywillgetmorespaceinthe
urbancentersandinstitutions.

771] ItisfurthermentionedintheinterviewinNote2thatthe
followingisacloserdescriptionofthecommunistmovementinIndia
todayaccordingtoaccusedno.6Saibabaandtherearethreedifferent
mainstreams oftherevolutionarymovementlike(a)CPNmaoist
peopleswar(b)Cpi(ml)naxalbari,ctandothersarealsoMaoistand
close to the Maoists. Also CPRCML, Red Flag, Communist
Revolutionary Platform, CCICP(ml), CPI(ml)central team, CPM
(ml)newdemocracy.Theseareallsmall,buttheyhaveamassbase.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
634 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Theypartakeinmassstrugglesbutdonotfollowacorrecttrack.They
followarightdeviationistline.CP(ml)liberationisnowfastturningto
revisionism,afairlylargeparty.Therearenoleftrevisionistgroups
remaining. There used to be Lin Biao groups, they hardly exist
anymore.

772] Furtheraccusedno.6Saibabastatedinthesaidinterview
that the last stream i.e. (c) of the revolutionary movement is
mentioned in above document is that Communist League(ml) split
fromtheCPI(ml)originallyinthe1970s.TheybelievethatIndiais
capitalist.Theysplitintofivedifferentgroups.Theyareverysmall.
Theyworkinurbanareas.Theyarepettybourgeois.Theyconstitutea
democratic voice in the country today. They voice the urban
democraticintellectuals. Inthesaidinterviewaccusedno.6Saibaba
gavedetailedhistoryoforganisationofCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontal
organisationRDFrightfrom1970.

773] From the document Article130A which was found in

possessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiisrelatingtoBriefReview
of FC in which the responsibilities of FC allotted to Jaddu and
Chetan in the FC meeting were mentioned. Further document at
Article130A seized from the possession of accused no.4 Prashant
RahishowsthatthepersonnamedChetanwasgivenresponsibility
ofWestBengal,KeralaandDelhiandthisfactiscorroboratedfrom
thecontentsofArt.155retrievedfromtheharddiscseizedfromthe
house search of accused no.6 Saibaba tiled as Revolutionary

DemocraticFront(RDF),AllIndiaECMeetingheldon8and9th
May 2007, Delhi in which it is stated that the responsibilities of
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
635 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

WestBengal, KeralaandDelhiwasgivento accusedno.6Saibaba,

and hence, it is clear that accused no.6 Saibaba is also known as
Chetan.

Followingaretheincriminatingvideoclipsfoundintheharddisc
seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabashowing
hisactivitiesinRDF.

1] Inthevideocliphavingpath Exh.9/mydvd/
VTS_01_1accusedno.6Saibabaisseensayingthat
he got inspiration from Kishanji and in the said
video accused no.6 Saibaba seen addressing the
meetingheldonthetributeonthedeathofKishanji
whereheisseensayingthathegotinspirationfrom
Kishanjiandfurtherthemeetingisheldunderthe
banner QthZ eqBHksM vkSj gR;kds f[kykQ la;qDr dUosa'ku
lanHkZ dk- fd'kuth.

2] Invideocliphavingpath Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE
LAAL/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1armednaxalsareseen
walking in jungle and background sound of CPI
(Maoist) Party spokesperson Aazad played and
states that Maoism teaches us self preservation is
possibleonlythroughwarandshowstheinterviews
ofsomenaxals.

3] Invideocliphavingpath Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE
LAAL/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2armednaxalsareseen
coming for gathering for function in jungle and
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
636 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

greetingeachotheralsomanyredbannersareseen
andonone banneritisseen thenamecomrade
Janki (Anuradha Gandhi) Amar Rahe and further
the gathered armed naxals and other peoples
shoutedtheslogansasBharatkiCommunistParty
Maowadi Zindabad, Bharat kiNavJanwadiKranti
Zindabadandfurtherencounterbyarmednaxalsin
whichpolicepersonswerekilledisseen.

4] Invideocliphavingpath Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE
LAAL/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3 armed naxals in
uniformareseentakingtrainingoffiringinjungle
and background sound of CPI (Maoist) party
spokespersonAazadplayedandhestatesaboutthe
CPI(Maoist)armedstrengthandtheinterviewsof
onenaxalinuniformabouttheKudruambushand
CPI (Maoist) promotional video is seen how the
ambushonpolicepartyisexecuted.

5] In videoclip having path Exh.16/(1)

NAXILISTES/ VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1 armed naxals
inuniformareseenwalkinginjungleandcamping,
attending public meeting showing naxal tactics in
jungle.

6] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DK MATTERS/Bhoomkal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
637 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

programme_2010/Kutul_ Maad/ kutul

bhoomkal_2010 armed naxals in uniform along
with the villagers are seen gathered in jungle to
celebrate the 10th anniversary of Bhoomkal and
they are shouting with the slogans as Lal Salam,
Mahan Bhoomkal Zindabad, Mahan Bhoomkal
Shahidonko Lal Salam and one armed naxal seen
addressingtothegatheringofaround2000to3000
peoplesandarmednaxals.

7] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DK
MATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_2010/Vayanar_
EBT/1/DSCN4236,armednaxalsinuniformalong
with the villagers are seen gathered in jungle are
shouting with the slogans as Jantana sarkar ko
majbutkaro,Dandkaranyakoaadharelakemebadal
dalo,Bharatkicommunistpartymaowadizindabad.

8] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_
2010/Vayanar_EBT/2/Bhoomakal_2010,armed
naxalsinuniformalongwiththevillagersareseen
marchinginjunglewithredcolouredbannersand
flags and some green coloured dressed girls seen
dancingandsingingonthestage.Furtheraround2
to3thousandvillagersgatheringalongwitharmed
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
638 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

CPI(Maoist)naxalsandonenaxalspeaksandmany
red coloured banners and pictures, naxal martyr
monumentareseenandCPI(Maoist)armednaxals
aredancingandonenaxaltakesvideoshootingof
thedance.

9] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Com.Kumlimartyrdym/
DKVF On Com.Kumli funerals / Kumli funerals
onenaxalladynamedKumliisseendeadandother
CPI(Maoist)naxalinuniformalongwithvillagers
performedherfuneral.

10] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DK MATTERS/FILM/1, some armed
naxalsinuniformareseenwalkinginjungles.

11] Inaudiofolderhavingpath Exh.3/Ritu/from

old comp 23 oct 2012/songs/DK CNM,
Jharkhand abhen album _2010, Jung Ki Pukar,
Kranti.gana, some songs, songs, containing
hundredsofrevolutionarynaxalsongsareseen.

13] In videoclip having path Exh.3/films/s1/

RDF/2/ VIDEO_ TS/VTS_01_1, the dignitaries
from different parts including accused no.6 G.N.
SaibabaisseenondaisalongwithSayadGilani,and
explainingaboutthemanifestoofRDFandfurther
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
639 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accused no.6 Saibaba have seen supporting the

Navjanvadi Kranti, further he have invited Arun
Pareira to release the book SCRIPTING THE
CHANGE WRITTENBYANURADHAGANDHYand
hasreleasedthebook.

14] In videoclip having path Exh.3/films/s1/

RDF/3/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3,thedignitariesfrom
differentpartsofIndiaincludingaccusedno.6G.N.
Saibaba are seen on dais and speaking about
Telangana and giving a call to give blood for
creationofTelangana.

16] In videoclip at path Exh.3/films/s1/

RDF/1 /VIDEO_TS/ VTS_01_3, RDF magazine
Janpratirodh is shown to audience by one of the
sikh person siting on the dais. Said magazine
Janpratirodhwasseizedfrom the house search of
accusedno.6Saibaba.

17] In videoclip having path Exh.3/films/

s1/RDF/1/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1,somemenand
women raised the slogans as Shahidonko Lal
Salam,NavjanwadiKrantiZindabad,EkHiRastaEk
HiRastaNaxalbariEkHiRasta..

18] In videoclip having path Exh.3/films/s1

/RDF/4/VIDEO _TS/VTS_ 01_3, accused no.6
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
640 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Saibabawasseensittingonthediasaddressingthe
peopleandcallingtheirsuggestionsonmanifestoof
RDFandvariouspersonshavespokenfromthedias
aboutmanifesto. Thisfactisclearfromdocument
at Page no.1 of Exh.267 Secretary's Report of
Revolutionary Democratic Front, document at
Art.A20 of Exh.266 and in document Art.161
havingpath ex4/6 Dec2011/others/Factfinding
report on the killing of CPI Maoist Politbureau
memberKishenjititledasStatementonthekilling
ofCPI(Maoist)PolibureaumemberKishenjithere
isreferenceofKishenjiwhowasCPI(Maoist)leader.

Followingarethelettersfoundintheharddiscseizedfromthe
housesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaand16GBmemorycard
showing the correspondence of accused no.6 Saibaba with the
ComradesofCPI(Maoist)

1] A document Art.A20 of Exh.266 is a letter

addressedtoComradeGeneralSecretary,TheCPI
(Maoist) by Mahesh written by accused no.4
Prashant Rahi who was chargesheeted in
Uttarakhand court by alias name 'Mahesh' which
was reflected from the chargesheet (Exh.264) in
which name of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi is
mentionedasPrashantSanglikar@PrashantRahi
@ Navin @ Mahesh Da @ Sima s/o Narayan
BabajiSanglikar.

2] Adocumentatpageno.86ofExh.267having
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
641 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

path Exh.4/researchwork/IMP/ Research Work/

Research plan/ personnel/ personnel/personnel

final /personal /contacts/final reply to Arman
letter by Saibaba is a letter addressed to Dear
ComradeArman(AIPRF)byaccusedno.6Saibaba.

3] A letteratpage no.87ofExh.267 taken out

fromtheharddiscExh.4havingpathExh.4/allOld
and new/newsis addressed to concerned
comrades dated20.12.2010sent by accusedno.6
SaibababyaliasnamePrakashandentireteam.

3] Aletteratpageno.88ofExh.267addressedto
DearComradewrittenbyaccusedno.6Saibababy
aliasnamePrakashandentireteam.

4] AdocumentatPageno.97ofExh.267having
path Exh.4/8 Oct 2012/120610DK/Martyrs Day

Eng titledas CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)

written by Gudsa Usendi, Spokesperson,
Dandakaranya Special Zonal Committee, CPI
(Maoist)headedbyObserveMartyrsWeekFrom
July28toAugust3!RedHomagetoOurPartys
Forefounders and Beloved Teachers Comrades
CharuMazumdarandKanhaiChatterjee!

5] Adocumentatpageno.205ofExh.267taken
outfromtheharddiscExh.4havingpathExh.4/All
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
642 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

other/Ifeeldemoralisedtoactonanyissue,isa
letterdated17June2003 addressedto Comrade
byPrakash.

6] Aletteratpageno.206ofExh.267takenout
from the harddisc Exh.4 having path
Exh.4/Data/personal/To,withtitleTOwrittento
Secretary SubCommittee on Mass Organization
(SUCOMO) CPI (Maoist) written by Prakash
dated 2 December 2006, is addressed to Dear
Comrade by accused no.6 Saibaba in alias name
Prakash.

7] AdocumentatPageno.208ofExh.267having
path Ex4/Cy47513Ex4/c/All other is a letter
addressed to Dear Comrades by Prakash (i.e.
accusedno.6Saibaba).

8] AdocumentatPageno.224ofExh.267having
path Ex4/C/Ritu13March/mydocuments/open
letter.final Jul.A09 is a open letter to United
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) from the
Communist Party of India (Maoist) addressed to
dear Comrade written by Central Committee CPI
(Maoist),Indiadated20July,2009.

Accusedno.6SaibabawasdesignatedasChiefCoordinator
betweenCPI(Maoist)andInternationalFraternalOrganization
connectedwithCPI(Maoist),India
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
643 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

774] Accused no.6 Saibaba was designated as Chief

CoordinatorbetweenInternationalFraternalOrganizationconnected
with CPI (Maoist), India and this fact is clear from the following
documentsintextform

1] Fromthedocumentatpageno.17ofExh.267
taken out from the hard disc Exh.4 having path
Exh.22/recovered folder/folder 003/Secretary's
report, titled as Secretary's report regarding
review of RDF work since its formation, it is
mentionedthat ThewholehouserejectedJoseph
andreiteratedthatPrakashshouldbethechiefco
ordinator. All of them unanimously said that if
Prakashwouldn'tacceptthere shouldbenochief
coordinator. The presidium ruled that despite
Prakash's rejection, he had to do it because the
wholehouseexpressedconfidenceinhim.Finally
Prakashagreedtotheresolution.Fromthisletter
it is clear that Prakash i.e. accused no.6 Saibaba
was elected as chief coordinator to build up
Communist Organizations throughout the country
andwithinternationalrelationswhowasactively
involvedinactivitiesofCPI(Maoist)tofurtherthe
activitiesofsaidorganisation.

[ii]AdocumentatPageno.57ofExh.267having
path Exh.4/c/forsaid/workingDirectory201/New

Folder/final months after correction /Manjeera/

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
644 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

core titledasMeetingofCoreofA3/A4onOct
2ndand3rd2006containedvariousresolutions
regarding the suggestions of demands for the
campaignofbuildingA3andA4,massmovement,
displacementmovementandfundsandbudgetsfor
the development of A3 and A4 committees of
banned organisation CPI (Maoist) working in
various States of India and it is mentioned that
Prakash i.e. accused no.6 Saibaba alongwith his
companion must take serious attempts at
consultation on all A4 FC decisions and other
matters concerning the organization. In this
documentitismentionedthatRegardingtheVice
Presidentship of A3, Joseph will continue till the
conferenceandPrakashwillbeaskedtotakethe
responsibility due to his greater role in A3 and
furtherstatedthat Prakashhasagreedtotakeon
theresponsibilityofA3networkingthroughthee
mailwithinternationalcontacts.Fromthisletterit
showsthatinternationalresponsibilitywasgivento
accusedno.6Saibaba.

Relationsofaccusedno.6SaibabawithInternationalFraternal

Organisations

775] Further from the following documents relating to

internationalcorrespondence,itisclearthataccusedno.6Saibabais
Chief Coordinator of CPI (Maoist), India and other fraternal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
645 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

organisation of other countries and he has taken responsibility for

communicationwithinternationalrelationsbyemailsandlettersand
tothateffectseveraldocumentsfiledonrecordshowingthataccused
no.6Saibabaismainleaderandwasactingasacoordinatorformoist
groupofCommunistPartyofIndiaandotherfraternalorganisations
offoreigncountries.

[i] Fromtheletterdated31March2005atpage
no.13ofExh.267takenoutfromtheharddiscExh.4
having path Exh.4/All other/lawyer's tour of
south Asia, it is clear that it was written To all
chapters and supporters wherein it is mentioned
that the Statements of 2nd International
DelegationtoSouthAsiainwhich itisstatedthat
the main purpose of this delegation was to
investigate the current situation of the Nepali
RevolutionaryLeadersC.PrakashGajurel(knownas
Comrade Gaurav) and Mohan Baidhya (known as
ComradeKiran)whoarebeingheldprisonerbythe
Indiangovernment. Itisfurtherstatedthatthe
delegation also came to the conclusion that the
arrest,mistreatmentandimprisonmentof19Nepali
nationalsinPatna,whowerelegallyinIndiaatthe
timeoftheirarrest,isanotherpoliticallymotivated
abuseoftherightsoftheseprisoners. TheIndian
government is also charging them with sedition
and inciting to wage war against India based
solely on their political views and their admitted
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
646 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

membershipinorsupportfortheCommunistParty
ofNepal(Maoist).

[iii] Adocumentatpageno.78ofExh.267having
path Exh.4/OLDEHD/OLD/All12345/ILPS/Dear

Arman, Exh.267 is a letter addressed to Dear

Armanwhereinitismentionedthatwhenaccused
no.6 Saibaba was in London, Holland and
Birmingham during their discussion some
representatives from India from antidisplacement
front, political prisoners and RDF, possibly anti
caste movement will join ILPS TIA and an
international team of ILPS to visit areas of anti
displacementmovementsinIndiainMarch2008to
come out with a report for international
propaganda.TheteamwillalsotovisitChhattisgarh
in the area effected by Salwa Judum, an area of
indigenouspeoplemostseriousaffectedinamajor
way.Otherimportantareas,amongothers,wouldbe
Nandigram and Singur West Bengal, Kalingnar,
Jagatisgapur and Kashipur in Orissa, and
Jharkhand. Further ILPS to aid and promote the
formation of international Solidarity Committees
supportingandtakinguptheissuesofIndianAnti
displacementmovementparticularlyinEuropeand
Americastostartwith.Furtherthisdocumentshows
that there are some international programmes of
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
647 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ILPS organisation and at the end of the letter

accusedno.6Saibabahasinformedtocontactsome
members so that they will understand the
importance of the organisation and at the foot of
this letter the email of accused no.6 Saibaba is
given.

[iv] Adocumentatpageno.81ofExh.267having
path Exh.4/All old and new/others/

international/dear GNSaibaba is a letter on the

letter head of ATIK (Avrupa Turkiyeli Isciler
Konfedersasyonu),TurqueandEuropeaddressedto
accused no.6 G.N.Saibaba from Chairperson of
InternationalRelationCommissionATIKwhereinit
is mentionedthat said ATIK launched a campaign
for the solidarity with the Indian people and
people's movement against Operation Green Hunt
(OGH)aschemeofIndianGovernmentandinvited
SeniorMaoistleadersfromIndiatoEuropeandalso
talkedtoTurkeyaboutthejoiningofMaoistleaders.
Fromthisletteritrevealsthataccusedno.6Saibaba
isanactivememberofCPI(Maoist)Indiaandhe
has relations with other Maoist organisations
workinginforeigncountries.

[v] Adocumentatpageno.92ofExh.267having
path Exh.4/OLDEHD/All others 2/Arrange/Azad

matter/Communist/ Movement in which the

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
648 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

recitals were shown against imperialism, against

modernfascism,struggle,organizeandconstruct
theparty writtenbyCommunistPartyMaoistItaly,
France,TurkeyNorthKurdistanandsuggestedthat
to install amid the rebel youth of the imperialist
banlieues, constructing youth revolutionary
organisms and to give support and orientation to
the student struggles, immigrants, lodgement
occupants,tothepopularstrugglesontheterritories
against military bases and further strengthen and
expand women's struggle, constructing a
revolutionary proletarian feminist movement. To
struggle against repression, in developing
campaigns and Red Aid organisms. On the
international level to support all antiimperialist
strugglesandpeoples'warsandfurthersuggestedto
contributetoanewunityamongcommunistparties
onthebasisontheproletarianinternationalism,the
assertionofMarxismLeninismMaoism,thepathto
revolution.Attheendofletterthereismentionof
Communist Party Maoist Italy, Communist Party
MaoistFrance,CommunistPartyMaoistTurkey
NorthKurdistan.

[vi] AdocumentatPageno.114ofExh.267titled
as On the Occasion of Martyrdom of Comrade
AzadExpressingsolidaritywithCommunistParty
of India (Maoist) is an article published by
Communist (Maoist) Party of Afghanistan on the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
649 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

occasionofMartyrdomofComradeAzad,aMaoist
LeaderofIndia.Thecontentsofthesaiddocument
shows that Comrade Azad, spokesperson for
CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist),wasamember
ofcentralcommitteeandheplayedaverycritical
anddecisiveroleatthecurrentjuncture:atatime
whenthereactionaryIndianstateononehandhas
mobilizedmorethan250000policeandmercenary
forces against the Maoist peoples war within the
framework of a large military campaign called
OperationGreenHunt.

[vii] Adocumentatpageno.136ofExh.267titled
as Prabhatham will not die shows that the
genocideinSriLankaonTamilsisthecontinuation
of aggression on the fighting people of Pelestine,
Afghanistan and Iraq and it is alleged that this
genocide on the Eelam struggle under the
leadership of V Prabhakaran was supported by
IndianGovernment.

[viii] A document at Page no.137 of Exh.267 is

under the head of Office of the Prime Minister
Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam, 875,
AvenueoftheAmericas,Suite1001,NewYork,NY
1001,USA, dated19February2011titledasWe
share this Joyful moment with the people of
Egypt!.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
650 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

[ix] A document at Page no.139 of Exh.267 is

under the head of Office of the Prime Minister
Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam, 875,
AvenueoftheAmericas,Suite1001,NewYork,NY
1001,USA,dated8March2011titledasVehement
condemnation of Despicable Attack on Member of
ParliamentSivagunanaminSriLanka!.

[x]AdocumentatPageno.224ofExh.267having
path Ex4/C/Ritu13March/mydocuments/open
letter.final Jul.A09 is a open letter to United
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) from the
Communist Party of India (Maoist) showing the
relationsinbetweenCPI(Maoist),IndiaandUnited
CommunistPartyofNepal(Maoist).Furtherthereis
mentionofNaxalbariinthesaidopenletterbyCPI
(Maoist) India to the Comrades of CPI (Maoist)
fromothercountries.
Photographsandvideoclipsshowingtheinternationalrelations
ofaccusedno.6Saibaba

776] Further, following photographs which show the

international relations of accused no.6 Saibaba with the fraternal
organisationworkinginothercountries.
1] Inthephotographatpageno.152ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisc Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/Allphotos/photosmany/CRPPconference
photos/pictures, accused no.6 Saibaba is seen
alongwithRonaWilson.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
651 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

2] Inthephotographatpageno.153ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisc Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/All photos/photos many/ political
programmes/meeting/TIA ILPS, accused no.6
Saibabaisseenonstagewithsomeoftheforeigners
attending the 3rd International assembly of
internationalleagueofPeople'sStruggleILPSheldat
Hongkong.

3] Inthephotographatpageno.154ofExh.267
taken out from the harddisc Exh.5 having path
Exh.5/All photos/photos many/political
programmes/meeting/TIA ILPS, accused no.6
Saibabaisseenalongwithsomeforeignerandone
IndianladySomaSen.

4] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/3 /VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3, the dignitaries from
different parts including accused no.6 Saibaba is
seenondiasandhasinvitedRonaWilsontoread
out the message from Nagaland. Rona Wilson has
read the message from Nagaland regarding the
revolutionary struggle of the people of Nagaland,
Assam,KashmirEtc.andtheirsupporttoRDF.

777] Fromallabovedocuments,videoclips,photographsitis
clearthataccusedno.6SaibabaisthefounderofRDFandhedrafted
the constitution of RDF and he was acting as a Chief Coordinator
betweenCPI(Maoist)Indiaandotherfraternalorganizationsofother
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
652 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

countries and he was active member of RDF and made several

correspondencetomembersofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)and
RDF.

Roleofaccusedno.3HemMishra

778] Accused no.3 Hem Mishra was found in suspicious

circumstancesalongwithaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2Pandu
Narote and from his possession 16 GB memorycard of Sandisc
companywasfoundcontainingincriminatingarticlesArt.A17toA21
and Kodak camera with charger containing 12 photographs in
internalmemoryofcamera.

1] The document at Art.A17 in Hindi language

addressedtoLalSalambyJ.V. showsthatitisin
respectofJanaSanghathanandJanaAndolanand
suggestedtointerfereintheproblemswhichwere
goingonintheorganization.Further,onperusalof
documentat Art.A18 inHindilanguageaddressed
to Jan Sanghathan and Sanyukta Morcha by
N.R.B. it reveals that there were suggestions to
makeeffortaboutstrengtheningandexpandingthe
party and to struggle against repression, in
developing campaigns and unlawful organization
and lastly to support all antiimperialist struggles
and peoples' wars on the international level.
Further,fromthecontentsofthesaiddocumentitis
clearthattherewasarevolutionbytheCommunist
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
653 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Party of India (Maoist) and they were struggling

armed rebellion against the Government and it is
the great achievement developed in the form of
KrantikariJanaAndolan.

2] The document at Art.A18 is also in Hindi

language is addressed to Jan Sanghathan and
Sanyukta Morcha by N.R.B.,it reveals that there
were suggestions to make effort about
strengthening and expanding the party and to
struggleagainstrepression,indevelopingcampaigns
andunlawfulorganizationandlastlytosupportall
antiimperialist struggles andpeoples'warson the
internationallevel.Further,fromthecontentsofthe
saiddocumentitisclearthattherewasarevolution
bytheCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)andthey
were struggling armed rebellion against the
Government and it is the great achievement
developedintheformofKrantikariJanaAndolan.
FromthesaiddocumentitisclearthatN.R.B.,apart
ofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontal
organization RDF were trying to furthering their
terrorist activities like armed rebellion against the
Government through PLGA and Krantikari Jana
Aandolanalloverthecountry.

3] Adocumentat Art.A19retrievedfromthe16
GB memorycard of Sandisk company seized from
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
654 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

the possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra is a

letter addressed to Dear friends Red Salute by
Sahyadri State Committee of Maharashtra CPI
(Maoist) titled as Oppose the Government's
ongoing war against the people of Garhchiroli
district. In the said document detail history
alongwithdateandtimeregardingkillingofaround
17naxalsinencounterbyGadchirolipoliceisgiven
asunder:
1] On 4.4.2013 five maoists were killed near
Batparvillage.
2] On20.1.2013policekilledsixmaoistsnamely
ShankarLakda,amemberofDivisionalCommittee,
Mohan Kowase, Acm, Vinod Kodape Acm, Geeta
Usendi,PlatoonDeputyCommander,JuruMattami
andRajuGavdeatGovindgaonvillage.
3] On 12.4.2013 at village Sindesur police
encircled and indiscrimately fired on a jan sabha
(publicmeeting)killing6peoplenamelySukhdev,
Varlu Gave and Kalidas Duru Hidko and Comrade
KailashamemberofTippagarhareacommitteewas
killedwhenhecamedowntosavethepeople.

Further around 35 incidents of beating

ofnaxals/membersofCPI(Maoist)atthehandsof
Gadchirolipolicearegiven.Inthesaiddocumentit
isfurthermentionedthataround10000policestaff
alongwith modern weapons like AK47, LMG, SLR
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
655 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

areequipped,however,thePLGAontheotherhand
havingoldweaponslikeBharmarandaxe. Inthe
said letter appeal was made to fight against
paramilitaryforces,commandoforcestostopGreen
Hunt Operation launched by the Government.
Lastly, in the saiddocument it isstatedthatmass
movement and armed struggle both are equally
importantandarenecessaryfortherevolution.

4] The document Art.A20 addressed to

ComradeGeneralSecretary,TheCPI(Maoist)by
Maheshrevealsthatitwaswrittenbyaccusedno.4
Prashant Rahi who was chargesheeted in
Uttarakhandcourtbyaliasname'Mahesh'inwhich
hehadshownhispositionaboutexpellinghimfrom
thepartyashewasgivingsecreteinformationtothe
police i.e. enemy of the banned organization CPI
(Maoist).Hehasmentionedinthesaidletterthat
Ilearnt,afewdaysafterIwasreleased,thatIhave
beenexpelledfromtheparty.Thesaiddecisionto
expelmewastakensummarily,withouttellingme
whatIwasaccusedof. Therewasnoquestionof
theirhavinggivenmeachancetodefendmyself,or
to explain anything. It was a purely
unconstitutionalact. Thepartyhasmuchtodoto
regainitslossesandimproveitsorganisationaland
mass practice (essentially, tactics) and I am ever
willingtocontinuegivingmylevelbest.Ofcourse,I
canmanageonmyownforthetimebeing,andam
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
656 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

also trying to help my other close comrades to

preserve the party spirit in the hope of
reunity/reorganisation. I am also quite confident,
now that I have had the opportunity to face the
ordeal of arrest, torture, and solitary confinement
for prolonged period, uncertainties, and all that,
thatevenwithsuchenormousCentrallossesIcan
bepartoftheoverallprocessofrebuilding,evenifI
have to do without the rightful collective at the
committee level. From the above document it is
clear that accused no.3 Hem Mishra and accused
no.4PrashantRahiareconspiredtogethertocarry
outtheobjectofconspiracy.

5] FromdocumentatArt.A21addressedto
DearComradeRedSaluewrittenbyJadduand
PrakashinwhichthedemandofRs.3Lakhsforthe
expenditure of Conference, Rs.2 Lakhs for
publishing books, Rs.2.5 Lakhs for loan to be
cleared,Rs.1Lakhforseniorcomrade's,Rs.4Lakhs
to run the activities,total Rs.13Lakhs wasmade.
Fromthecontentsofthesaidletteritrevealsthat
therearemanyactivitiesamongstthemembersof
bannedorganizationandletterstothateffectwere
issuedbyaccusedno.6Saibabafromtimetotime
andfromthisletterwhichshowsthatdemandsof
fundfortheprogressoforganizationwasmadeand
this letter was found in the 16 GB memorycard
seized from the possession of accused no.3 Hem
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
657 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Mishrawhichshowstherelationsbetweenaccused
no.6Saibabaandaccusedno.3HemMishra.

6] ThecameraofKodakcompany(Art.30)
was seized from accused no.3 Hem Mishra under
panchanama(Exh.137)andintheinternalmemory
ofsaidcameraelevenphotographswerefoundand
in one of the photograph accused no.6Saibaba is
seen sitting on wheelchair. Hence, finding of
photographofaccusedno.6Saibabaintheinternal
memoryofKodaccameraseizedfromthepossession
ofaccusedno.3HemMishra,itselfshowsthatthey
both were knowing to each other and were in
relation.

7] IntheinternalmemoryofKodakcamera
there is photograph of 16 GB, 18 GB and 32 GB
memorycard which shows that the members of
bannedorganisationareusingelectronicgadgetsas
a mode for communication of vitalinformation to
comradetocomarde.

Followingaretheincriminatingphotographsfoundinthehard
disc seized from the house search of accused no.6 Saibaba in
which the accused no.3 Hem Mishra was seen. The said
incriminatingphotographsareasunder:

1] In photographhavingpath Harddisc EXH3

/C/newfolder(2)/allmettersI/photosutt.rdf.
ConventionPhotos/rdf,accusedno.3HemMishra
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
658 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

is seen on stage singing song with instrument in

conventionofRDFUttarakhand.

2] In photograph having path EXH 3/C/new

folder(2)/ all metters (i) /photos / utt. rdf.
accused no.4 Prashant Rahi is seen along with
delegatesoftheRDFconferenceUttarakhandand
accused no.3 Hem Mishra isseen participating in
thatconference.

3] In photograph having path Harddisc EXH

5 /data/ C/all photos / photos many/ iphone
photos, accused no.3 Hem Mishra is seen
attending a meeting along with Rona Wilson and
AjayKumar.
4] In photograph having path Harddisc EXH
5/Data/C/allphotos/4Dec.conventionphotos,
accused no.3 Hem Mishra is seen attending a
meeting.

5] In photograph having path Harddisc EXH

3/C/newfolder(2)/allmettersI/photosutt.rdf.
ConventionPhotos/rdf,accusedno.3HemMishra
is seen on stage singing song with instrument in
conventionofRDFUttarakhand.

6] In photographno.(3827)foundinharddisc
thereisbannerofredcolourhavingwordVartaman
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
659 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

andinfrontofthebannerthereare8personsand
accused no.3 Hem Mishra is singing song with
Dough.

7] In photograph having path EXH 3 /C/new

folder(2)/all metters (i)/photos /utt. rdf. the
accused no.3 Hem Mishra and accused no.4
PrashantRahiareseenalongwithdelegatesofthe
RDFconferenceUttarakhand.

8] In thephotographhavingpath Harddiscex
3/C/new folder (2)/All metters 1/Hems
photos/images personal photograph of accused
no.3HemMishraandaccusedno.4PrashantRahi
wereappearing.

Followingarethevideoclipsfoundintheharddiscseizedfrom
thepossession ofaccusedno.6Saibabaandaccusedno.3Hem
Mishra was seen attending meeting. The said incriminating
videoclipsareasunder:

1] In videoclip having path Exh.7/Exh.71/

(1)DVD/ 091204/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1 accused
no.3 Hem Mishra is seen in the audience of the
meetingforConventionagainstWaronPeopleheld
atSpeaker'shallConstitutionClubRafiMarg,New
Delhion4thDecember2009byForumAgainstWar
on PeoplealongwithSaibabawhoissittingonthe
dais.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
660 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

2] In videoclip having path at Ex7/Ex73/

(10DVD_ 091204/VIDEO_TS accused no.3 Hem
Mishra is seen while taking photographs with the
helpofcameraandonepersonisaddressing with
thehelpofspeakerandhewasseenmovinginthe
row between two peoples and around 30 to 40
peopleinleftsiderowand30to40peopleinright
riderowunderthebannerof Conventionagainst
Waronpeople,ForumAgainstWaronPeople.Itis
important to note that Kodak camera was seized
from the possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra
underpanchanamaExh.137.

3] In videoclip fromDVDatExh.111,2accused
no.3 Hem Mishra is seen taking active part and
singingsongtocondemnthedeathofKishanji(CPI
MAOISTLeader)andgivingslogansLalSalam.

4] In videoclip having path Ex7/Ex71/

(10DVD_ 09204/VIDEO_TS accused no.3 Hem
Mishraisseentakingactivepartandsingingsongto
condemnthedeathofKishanji(NaxalLeader)and
givingslogansLalSalam.

5] In videoclip having path

Exh.3/Meetings/Jiten Convention Against Death
Penalty/20 Dec 2011 Jiten Convention 2
Compressed version/convention disc
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
661 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

2/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3,accusedno.3HemMishra
isseenalongwithagroupof10to12youngpeople
whilesingingthesongandthesongwhichwassung
byJitanMarandiandthereafterhealongwiththe
grouphavepresentedthesaidsong.

6] In videoclip having path

Exh.3/Meetings/Jiten Convention Against Death
Penalty/20 Dec 2011 Jiten Convention 2
Compressed version/convention disc 2/VIDEO
_TS/VTS_01_4, accused no.3 Hem Mishra along
with 10 to 12 young person are seen presenting
song on Jharkhand and made announcement
regardingpresentingasonginPunjabi.

7] In videoclip having path Exh.3

/Meetings/Jiten Convention Against Death
Penalty/20 Dec 2011 Jiten Convention 2
Compressed version/convention disc 2/VTS
_01_5, onepersonisseenaddressingagathering
and accused no.3 Hem Mishra is seen taking
photographs,theeventisunderbannerConvention
and Cultural Performance 20 December 2011 at
India International Centre, New Delhi, in this
programmeaccusedno.6Saibabaisalsopresent.

8] In videoclip having path Exh.7/Exh.71/

(1)DVD/091204/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1accusedno.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
662 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

3HemMishraisseenintheaudianceofthemeeting
for Convention against War on People held at
Speaker's hall Constitution Club Rafi Marg, New
Delhion4thDecember2009byForumAgainstWar
onPeopleandaccusedno.6Saibabaissittingonthe
dias.

779] FromtheCDRreportofmobileSIMnumber9873877513
at Exh.330 and mobile SIM number 8860601278 at Exh.331
belongingtoaccusedno.3HemMishra,itrevealsthaton12.12.2012,
05.07.2013, 08.07.2013, 08.07.2013, 09.07.2013, 31.07.2013,
03.03.2313,08.04.2013,04.07.2013and05.07.2013accusednos.3
Hem Mishra and no.6 Saibaba were in contact with each other.
Further, from CDR report of accusedSaibabaat Exh.413it reveals
that accused no.3 Hem Mishra made phone calls to accused no.6
SaibabaonhismobileSIMno.8800100490on15.9.2012,8.7.2013,
10.7.2013,31.7.2013and2.8.2013. Thisshowsthataccusedno.3
Hem Mishra and accused no.6 Saibaba were in contact with each
other.

780] Thematerialonrecordi.e.documents(Arts.A17toA21),
findingofphotographofaccusedno.6Saibabaintheinternalmemory
ofcameraofaccusedno.3HemMishra,CDRdetails(Exhs.330,331
and413)andtheconductoftheaccusedno.3HemMishrashowsthat
accused no.3 Hem Mishra is the active member of banned
organisationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDFandwas
circulatingtheimportantinformationintheformofelectronicdatain
16GBmemorycardinrespectofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)to
theundergroundnaxalinGadchirolidistrictandfromthedocument
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
663 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

atArt.A19foundin16GBmemorycardseizedfromthepossessionof
accusedno.3HemMishrainrespectofarmedrebellionfurthershows
thatheisanactivememberofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist).

Roleofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi

781] During interrogation with accused no.3 Hem Mishra

involvementofaccusedno.4Prashantwasrevealedandaccusedno.4
Prashant Rahi alongwith accused no.5 Vijay Tirki was found at
ChichgadT point Devri in suspicious condition and from his
possessionincriminatingarticleslikeYatricard,newspaperbyname
Dainik Bhaskar and document Art.130A containing eight pages
relating to banned organisation CPI (Maoist) alongwith the type
written papers of Maoist leader Narayan Sanyal were seized and
reference to that effect with the name of Maoist leader Narayan
SanyalisalsofoundinPageno.1ofthedocumentatExh.267titledas
Secretary's Report which was recovered in the harddisc seized
fromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.Thosedocumentsare
asunder

1]ThedocumentArticle130Awhichwasfoundin
the possession of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi is
relating to Brief Review of FC in which the
responsibilitiesofFCallottedtoJadduandChetan
in the FC meeting were mentioned. Further
document at Article130A seized from the
possessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahishowsthat
thepersonnamedChetanwasgivenresponsibility
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
664 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

of West Bengal, Kerala and Delhi and this fact is

corroboratedfromthecontentsofArt.155retrieved
fromtheharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchof
accused no.6 Saibaba tiled as Revolutionary
Democratic Front (RDF), All India EC Meeting
heldon8and9thMay2007,Delhiinwhichthe
responsibilitiesofWestBengal,KeralaandDelhiwas
giventoaccusedno.6Saibaba,andhence,itisclear
that accused no.6 Saibaba is also known as
Chetan.

2]Furtherinthesaiddocumentresponsibilitiesof
FCarementionedandtheresponsibilitiesallottedto
JadduandChetanintheFCmeetingarewrittenas
under
TheresponsibilitiesofJaddu :Inchargeofworkers
organization. Jan Pratirodh and incharge of the
stateUnitsofBihar,PunjabandUttarakhand.Looks
afterpartycellsamongtheworkers'unionafterthe
localpartybecamedefunct.
TheresponsibilitiesofChetan:TUFonWaragainst
People, International work, People's Resistance,
InchargeofStateUnitsofWestBengal,Keralaand
Delhiandresponsiblefortakingupeffortstoform
A3inTamilNadu.

782] OnperusalofthecontentsofthedocumentatArt.130Ait
reveals that the name 'Jaddu' i.e.incharge ofworkersorganisation
JanPratirodhandreferenceofJadduhasalsocomeinArticleNo.A21
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
665 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

foundin16GBmemorycardwhichwasseizedfromthepossessionof
accusedno.3HemMishrawhilehewascarryingittounderground
naxalsinforestareaofGadchirolidistrict andthedutieswhichare
giventoChetanrelatestoaccusedno.6Saibabaandinthelastparaof
page no.2 of this document the problem and weaknesses of FC
functioning were given and reference to that effect was given in
document titled as 'Review of RDF work since its Formation' i.e.
Secretary'sreportfoundintheharddiscseizedfromthehousesearch
ofaccusedno.6Saibabaandfiledonrecordatpageno.29ofExh.267
atpointno.9wherethefunctioningofFChasbeendescribedandin
parano.2theword,antidisplacementwasusedinrelatestoChetan
and the work assigned to Jaddu in respect of Jan Pratirodh
magazine is mentioned in the document at Art.130A found in
possessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahi. Further, JanPratirodh
magazinewasseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

783] From the said document it is clear that accused no.4

PrashantRahiwasgiventaskofrunningBookStallintheCapitalto
facilitatepropermaintenance,distribution.Eventhoughhewilltake
thisresponsibilityindependentlyandhewasdirectedtodothiswork
incoordinationwithCFComrades.

784] Fromdocument Art.A20 addressedto ComradeGeneral

Secretary,TheCPI(Maoist)byMaheshitrevealsthatitwaswritten
by accused no.4 Prashant Rahi who was chargesheeted in
Uttarakhandcourtbyaliasname'Mahesh'inwhichhehadshownhis
displeasureaboutexpellinghimfromthepartyonthegroundthathe
gavesecreteinformationtothepolicei.e.enemy.Inthesaidletterhe
hasmentionedthatIlearnt,afewdaysafterIwasreleased,thatI
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
666 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

have been expelledfromtheparty. Thesaiddecisiontoexpelme

was taken summarily, without telling me what I was accused of.
Therewasnoquestionoftheirhavinggivenmeachancetodefend
myself,ortoexplainanything. Itwasapurelyunconstitutionalact.
The party has much to do to regain its losses and improve its
organisationalandmasspractice(essentially,tactics)andIamever
willingtocontinuegivingmylevelbest.Ofcourse,Icanmanageon
myownforthetimebeing,andamalsotryingtohelpmyotherclose
comrades to preserve the party spirit in the hope of
reunity/reorganisation. Iamalsoquiteconfident,nowthatIhave
hadtheopportunitytofacetheordealofarrest,torture,andsolitary
confinement for prolonged period, uncertainties, and all that, that
evenwithsuchenormousCentrallossesIcanbepartoftheoverall
process of rebuilding, even if I have to do without the rightful
collectiveatthecommitteelevel.

Followingaretheincriminatingphotographsfoundinpages1to
247 of Exh.267 retrieved from the harddisc seized from the
house search of accused no.6 Saibaba in which photograph of
accusedno.4PrashantRahiisseen

1] In photograph having path EXH 5/C/all

photos/photos sai/new folder1, accused no.4
Prashant Rahi is seen addressing a meeting of
Revolutionary Democratic Front supported by
TelanganaPrajaFront.

2] In photograph having path harddisc EXH 5

Data/C/allphotos/photosSai/Newfolder1,itis
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
667 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

seen that accused no.4 Prashant Rahi is seen

participating in a public meeting of Revolutionary
Democratic Front (Krantikari Janwadi Morcha)
furtheraccusedno.3HemMishraandno.6Saibaba
arealsoparticipatingthesaidmeeting.

3] Aphotographhavingpath harddisc3/C/new
folder(2)/Allmetters1/Hemsphotos/images,is
personal photograph of accused no.3 Hem Mishra
andaccusedno.4PrashantRahi.

Followingvideoclips found in harddisc seized from the house

searchofaccusedno.6Saibabainwhichaccusedno.4Prashant
Rahiisseen

1] In videoclip having path Exh.3/RDF

conference videos/ DVD_7/VIDEO_TS, accused
no.4 Prashant Rahi is seen attending and
participating in the convention in the first RDF
conferenceheldatHyderabadintheyear2012and
accused no.6 Saibaba was addressing the people
fromthestage.

2] In videoclip having path Exh.3/RDF

conference videos/ DVD_9/VIDEO_ TS/VTS_
01_3.VOB,accusedno.6Saibabaisseenaddressing
thattheexistingpanelofRevolutionaryDemocratic
Front(RDF)hasbeendissolvedandnewpanelhas
been formed in respect of which accused no.6
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
668 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Saibabarequested Rajkishoretoannouncethenew
panel of RDF and Rajkishore has made
announcementofthenamesofthepanelinwhich
comradeG.N.Saibaba(accusedno.6),comradeJitan
Marandi, comrade Varavararao, Comrade Chandra
kalaandothersarenamedaspanelmembers.

3] In a videoclip having path Exh.3/films/

s1/RDF/1/ VIDEO_ TS/VTS_01_2, the dignitaries
fromdifferentpartsincludingaccusedno.6Saibaba,
Dy.Secretary,RDFandaccusedno.4PrashantRahi
werecalledondaisascomradePrashantRahi and
thereafter accused no.4 Prashant Rahi was seen
below the banner of RDF on the dias along with
others.

4] In a videoclip having path Exh.3/ films/s1

/Jeetan1/video_TS/VTS_01_1, accused no.4
Prashant Rahi is seen on the dais alongwith four
personsinwhichoneladybelowherimagethename
Aparna,wifeofJeetaniswrittenisaddressing,below
thebannerofJanConventionandshehasstatedthat
Jeetan was making documentary at the relevant
time.

785] FromCDRreportofaccusedno.6SaibabaatExh.413itis
clear that on 06.09.2012, 19.05.2013, 21.05.2013, 03.06.2013,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
669 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

04.06.2013, 04.07.2013, 05.07.2013, 08.07.2013, 09.07.2013,

30.07.2013,31.07.2013and14.08.2013accusedno.6Saibabamade
phonecallfromhismobileSIMno.8800100490tomobileSIMno.
8394875017 of accused no.4 Prashant Rahi. Further, from CDR
report of accused Saibaba at Exh.413 it is clear that accused no.4
Prashant Rahi made phone calls to accused no.6 Saibaba on his
mobileSIMno.8800100490on13.9.2012,4.7.2013,5.7.2013and
14.8.2013.

786] Onperusalofabovedocuments,photographs,evidenceon
record, videoclips andCDR,it isclearthat accusedno.4Prashant
RahiisanactivememberofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)andits
frontal organisation RDF and from the contents of all documents
Art.130Aitrevealsthataccusedno.4PrashantRahialongwithother
accusedweretryingtoreleasetheprisonerswhoareseniorleadersof
CPI(Maoist) i.e.NarayanSanyal,ComradeShila,ComradeKobad
Gandhi,ComradeAmberdainthecadreof naxalmovementandto
formdefencecommitteefortheirreleaseonbehalfoforganization
suggesting formation of center at Dehli. Finding of eight pages
(Art.130A) alongwith the typed written pages in respect of maoist

NarayanSanyalinwhichitismentionedthat ekvksoknh lkU;ky lesr

vkB canh vu'ku ij withaccusedno.4PrashantRahiclearlyshows

that accused no.4 Prashant Rahi is the active member of banned
organisation CPI (Maoist) and its frontal organisation RDF. It is
important to note that the reference of Narayan Sanyal was also
foundatPageno.1ofthedocumentatExh.267titledasSecretary
Report.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
670 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Roleofaccusedno.5VijayTirki

787] The prosecution has proved the fact that on 2.9.2013

accused no.4 Prashant Rahi and no.5 Vijay Tirki was found in
suspiciouscircumstancesatChichgadTpointandtheywerecaught
andbroughtbyAPITiwari(PW14)ofPoliceStation,Chichgad,Dist.
Gondia to Police Station, Aheri. Before that they made entry in
Station Diary at Exh.275C in Chichgad Police Station District :
GondiyaandinAheriPoliceStation,personalsearchofaccusedno.4
PrashantRahiandaccusedno.5VijayTirkiwastaken,andfromthe
possessionofaccusedno.5VijayTirkialongwithotherarticlesdaily
newspaperDainikBhaskardated1.9.2013wasseized.Furtherfrom
thepersonalsearchofaccusedno.4PrashantRahitheYatricardand
otherarticlesDainikBhaskarNewspaperdated1.9.2013wasseized
under the seizure panchanama at Exh.179 dated 2.9.2013 and
immediatelyonthesamedayseizedpropertywasdepositedwiththe
MuddemalClerkofAheriPoliceStationP.W.13GaneshRathodand
entrytothateffectwasimmediatelytakeninMuddemalRegisterat
Exh.276Bonthesameday.Findingofnewspaperclearlyshowsthat
thesaidwasusedbymemberofbannedorganisationasidentification
codetorecognizethem.Fromthisitisclearthataccusedno.5Vijay
TirkihadbeentoChichgadtoreceiveaccusedno.4PrashantRahi,
andtotakehimsafelyinforestareaGadchirolitohavemeetingwith
undergroundnaxalRamdar.

Roleofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarote

788] That on 22.8.2013 accused nos.1 Mahesh Tirki, No.2

PanduNaroteandNo.3HemMishrawerearrestedatnearAheriBus
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
671 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Standatsecludedplaceandpersonalsearchofaccusednos.1Mahesh
Tirki,No.2PanduNaroteandNo.3HemMishrawastakenbyPolice
OfficerP.W.10AnilBadgujarandfromthepersonalsearchofaccused
no.1MaheshTirkiincriminatingdocumentsi.e.threenaxalpamphlets
Arts.139to141alongwithhispersonaldocumentswereseizedand
from the possession of accused no.2 Pandu Narote umbrella i.e.
identificationcodeusedbythemembersofbannedorganisationCPI
(Maoist)alongwithincriminatingarticleswereseizedandthesame
weredepositedwithmuddemalClerkofAheriPoliceStationP.W.13
GaneshRathodandanentrytothateffectwasimmediatelytakenin
MuddemalRegisteratExh.276Aonthesameday.

789] In the Confessional Statements, accused no.1 Mahesh

Tirkiandno.2PanduNarotestatedthatpriortotheincidenttheyhad
supplied material things like torch, meal to the naxals and they
received money for the same and at the instance of lady naxal
Narmadakkabeforetheincidentfortwotothreetimesandtheyhad
been to Ballarsha railway to receive the members of banned
organisationtohavemeetingswithundergroundnaxalsandon29th
May,2013attheinstanceofladynaxalNarmadakka accusedno.1
MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotealongwithP.W.9RajuAtramgave
amountofRs.5lactothemembersofCPI(Maoist)whocamefrom
Delhi to Ballarsha. Thisfact iscorroboratedfromthe evidence of
P.W.9RajuAtram.OnthedateofincidenttheyhadbeentoBallarsha
forreceivingaccusedno.3HemMishrawhocamefromDelhion20
22.8.2013andthereaftertookhimtoAheribusstandandtheywere
arrestedatsecludedplacenearAheribusstandandthereafterthey
werearrested.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
672 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

790] Fromnaxalpamphlets(Arts.139to141)seizedfromthe
possessionofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiitrevealsthat

i] Art.139 is a pamphlet issued by Bhakapa

(Maowadi),(GadchiroliDivision)makingallegations
against the decision of the Government todestroy
the life of Aadiwasis and shows that there was
opposetotheGovernmentpoliciesimplementedin
the Gadchiroli district i.e. implementation of
SurjagadProjectandGreenHuntOperationshowing
hatredtowardstheGovernment.

ii] Art.140 is a pamphlet issued by Bhumkal

JoharTeDandakaryanyaSpecialZonalCommittee,
Bhakapa(Maowadi),titledas,AmarShahidirkuLal
Salam

iii] Art.141 is a pamphlet issued by Bhartachi

Communist Party (Maowadi), Maharashtra Rajya
Samitititledas ^jk[k lkaHkkGqu Bsok jk[k >kysY;kaph]
laiyh ukgh y<kbZ vtqu [kSjykathph* andattheendit
is mentioned that ^[kSjykath gR;kdkaMkP;k lq=/kkjkauk
ikBh'kh ?kky.kkjs] iksfylka}kjs nfyrkaP;k gR;k dj.kkjs]
nfyrkar ng'kr iljfo.kkjs egkjkV 'kklu eqnkZckn !--
uotuoknh dzkafr f>ankckn*

791] Further, on perusal of record Navjanwadi Kranti

JindabadmentionedinArt.141isasloganusedinmanyvideosof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
673 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

RDF conference found in harddiscs, CDs, DVDs, pendrives which

wereseizedfromhousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabawhichshows
that he was also active member of RDF, a frontal organization of
bannedorganizationCPI(Maoist).

792] From the possession of accused no.2 Pandu Narote the

articleslikeUmbrellaandnewspaperwhichwasusuallyusedbynaxal
asidentificationcodetorecognizeeachotherwereseized.Thisfactis
corroborated by the letter found in harddisc seized from house
searchofaccusedno.6Saibabaatpageno.90ofExh.267havingpath
Exh.4/AllSai/forstudy/latest/Vanja'stitledasIamconvincedthe
Naxalites(Maoists)havealotofsupportinwhichitismentioned
thatAnewspaperandbananashelpedlinkupwithMaoists.

793] Onperusalofabovedocumentsandevidenceonrecordit
isclearthataccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteatthe
instance of lady naxal Narmadakka hadbeen to Ballarsha Railway
Station to receive member of CPI (Maoist) i.e. accused no.3 Hem
Mishra and they were taking accused no.3 Hem Mishra who was
found in possession of 16 GB memorycard containing the naxal
literature (ArticleA17 to A21) for supplying the same to the
undergroundnaxalsinGadchiroliDistrict.Theaccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirkiwasfoundinpossessionofthreenaxalpamphlets(Arts.139to
141) and on perusal of Art.139 containing matter opposing for
implementationofSurjagadprojectandagainstthedevelopmentin
ruralarea.Accusedno.2PanduNarotewasalsofoundinpossession
ofNewspaperandUmbrellawhicharetheidentificationcodeusedby
membersofbannedorganisationtorecognizeeachother.Hence,itis
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
674 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

clear that both accused no.1 Mahesh and no.2 Pandu are active
members of banned organization CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organizationRDF.

RDFisfrontalorganizationofCPI(Maoist)

794] It is important to note that from 22 June 2009 the

CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)andallitsfrontalorganizations
havebeendeclaredasterroristorganization. Nowitisnecessaryto
see whether the Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) is frontal
organizationofCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist).

795] OnperusalofSecretary'sReportatpageno.1ofExh.267
having path Exh4/rdf/june 2012/conference material/RDF first

conference/ Secretary's report final unamended titled as

Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) First Conference of the
Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) dated 2223 April,
SundaraiyaVeigyan Bhavan,Hyderabad,Telangana addressedto
ComradesandFriendsbyRedsalutetoalldelegates,itrevealsthat
membersofRDFisconcernwithCPI(Maoist)andtheytookanactive
partinreleasingmembersofCPI(Maoist).Fromthesaiddocumentit
is clear that RDF made agitations, protest, dharnas and marches
againstthearrestofcomradeNarayanSanyalwhoismemberofCPI
(Maoist)andcampaignwasorganizedontheunconditionalreleaseof
politicalprisonerslikecomradesSushilRoy,PattipawanHaldarand
othersandbandhcallwasgivenbyRDF,whenMaoistleadercomrade
Sheela Devi was arrested and all India convention against war on
people was organized in context of declaration of operation green
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
675 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

hunt.ThisshowsthatRDFisafrontalorganizationofCPI(Maoist).
Videoclipsno.1to5areasunder:
1] FromthevideocliphavingpathEx7/Ex71/
(10DVD_09204/VIDEO_TSitisclearthataccused
no.3 Hem Mishra is seen taking active part and
singingsongtocondemnthedeathofKishanjiwho
isleaderofCPI(Maoist).

2] From videoclip having path

Exh.3/Meetings/Jiten Convention Against Death
Penalty/20 Dec 2011 Jiten Convention 2
Compressed version/convention disc 2/
VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3,accusedno.3HemMishrais
seenalongwithagroupof10to12youngpeople
andaccusedno.4PrashantRahiarespeakingfrom
the podium regarding death sentence to Jiten
Marandi,whoisamemberofCPI(Maoist).

3] In the videoclip having path Exh.9/my

dvd/VTS_01_1 accused no.6 Saibaba seen saying
thathegotinspirationfromKishanjiandinthesaid
video accused no.6 Saibaba seen addressing the
meetingheldonKishanjiwherehealsosayingthat
he got inspiration from Kishanji and further the
meeting is held under the banner QthZ eqBHksM vkSj
gR;kds f[kykQ la;qDr dUosa'ku lanHkZ dk- fd'kuth and
nearthebanneronephotographofapersoninnaxal
dressisseen.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
676 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

4] In videoclip having path Exh.9/my

dvd/VTS_01_2 accused no.6 Saibaba is seen
addressing the aforesaid meeting on Kishanji and
accusedno.6SaibabahasofferedtributestoKishanji
on behalf of RDF and stated that the RDF will
continue with the revolutionary thoughts and
missionofKishanji.

5] In videoclip having path Exh.3/films/ s1/

RDF/4/VIDEO_TS/VTS_ 01_3, the accused no.6
Saibabawasseensittingonthediasaddressingthe
peopleandcallingtheirsuggestionsonmanifestoof
RDFandvariouspersonshasspokenfromthedias
aboutmanifesto.Thisfactisclearfromdocumentat
Page no.1 of Exh.267 Secretary's Report of
Revolutionary Democratic Front, document at
Art.A20 of Exh.266 and in document Art.161
havingpath ex4/6 Dec2011/others/Factfinding
report on the killing of CPI Maoist Politbureau
member Kishenji titled as Statement on the
killing of CPI (Maoist) Polibureau member
KishenjithereisreferenceofKishenjiwhowasCPI
(Maoist)leader.

The above videoclips no.1 to 5 were

foundintheharddiscseizedfromthehousesearch
ofaccusedno.6Saibaba.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
677 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

796] AdocumentatArt.A19ofExh.266retrievedfromthe16
GBmemorycardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthepossessionof
accusedno.3HemMishra,isaletteraddressedtoDearfriendsRed
Salute by Sahyadri State Committee of Maharashtra CPI (Maoist)
titledasOpposetheGovernment'songoingwaragainstthepeopleof
Garhchiroli district ! Condemn the brutalattacksonpeople,mass
leaders and people's warriors. Propose the happening massacres in
the name of encounters and take initiative to put forth the
Government'scrueltybeforesociety!.ThisshowsthatRDFishaving
deepconcernwithCPI(Maoist).

797] AdocumentArt.A20ofExh.266retrievedfromthe16GB
memorycard of Sandisk company seized from the possession of
accusedno.3HemMishra,isaletteraddressedtoComradeGeneral
Secretary, The CPI (Maoist) by Mahesh written by accused no.4
PrashantRahiwhowasChargeSheetedinUttarakhandcourtbyalias
name 'Mahesh'. This shows that accused no.4 Prashant Rahi is
connectedwithCPI(Maoist).

798] FromthedocumentArt.159ofExh.267havingpath ex.

4/31.12.12/RDF Conference material/DRAFT MANIFESTO OF

RDF amended by conference found in harddisc seized from the
housesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaititledas,DraftManifestoof
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)inwhichitisconstituted
below the head Draft Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF)
Constitutionthatthenameoforganisationare(a)Revolutionary
DemocraticFront(RDF)inEnglish. (b)KrantikariJanwadiMorcha
(RDF) in Hindi and (c) In different states the name of the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
678 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

organisationshouldbewrittenintherespectivelanguagesbutRDF
should be kept with brackets. Further, this document shows that
there is popular slogan of RDF is Naxalbari Ek Hi Rasta. This
showsthatRDFisalsoconcernwithCPI(Maoist)andfollowingare
the letters, documents addressedtoComradestoComrades bythe
members of banned organization which are foundin the harddisc
seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

799] A document at Page no.97 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/8 Oct 2012/120610DK/Martyrs DayEng titled as
Communist Party of India (Maoist) written by Gudsa Usendi,
Spokesperson, Dandakaranya Special Zonal Committee, CPI
(Maoist) headedbyObserveMartyrsWeekFromJuly28toAugust
3!RedHomageto Our PartysForefoundersandBelovedTeachers
ComradesCharuMazumdarandKanhaiChatterjee!

800] A letter at page no.206 of Exh.267 taken out from the

harddiscExh.4havingpathExh.4/Data/personal/To,withtitleTO
written to Secretary SubCommittee on Mass Organization
(SUCOMO) CPI (Maoist) written by Prakash dated 2 December
2006,addressedtoDearComradebyaccusedno.6Saibaba.

801] AdocumentatPageno.224ofExh.267havingpath Ex
4/C/Ritu13March/mydocuments/openletter.finalJul.A09 isa
openlettertoUnitedCommunistPartyofNepal(Maoist)fromthe
Communist Party of India (Maoist) addressed to dear Comrade
written by Central Committee CPI (Maoist), India dated 20 July,
2009.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
679 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

802] The documentPageno.103ofExh.267isaResolutionof

Government of Andhra Pradesh titled as Government of Andhra
Pradesh Abstract written by Minnie Mathew, Chief Secretary to
Government reveals that Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF)
formed with the merger of All India People's Resistance Forum
(AIPRF)andStrugglingForumforPeople'sresistance(SFPR)inMay
2005, is a part of Tactical United Front. Contents of the said
documentclearlyrevealsthatinexerciseofthepowersconferredby
subsection(1)ofsection3oftheAndhraPradeshPublicSecurityAct,
1992(AndhraPradeshAct21of1992),theGovernmentofAndhra
Pradesh,hereby,declaretheRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)a
front organization of Communist Party of India (Maoist) as an
unlawfulassociation.

803] The document at page no.107 of Exh.267 which is a

Gazette Notification of Home Department of Orissa Government
dated 20th June 2006 wherein it is mentioned that Revolutionary
DemocraticFront(RDF)subservingtheinterestsandobjectivesofthe
Communist Party of India (Maoist), has been indulging in the
unlawfulactivitiesandlastly,bythisNotification,OrissaGovernment
declared the Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) to be an
unlawfulassociationwithimmediateeffect.

TheseabovetwoNotificationsbanningRDFwerefoundinthe
harddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.

804] ThisshowsthatthemembersofRDFareworkinghardfor
thereleaseofmembersofCPI(Maoist)continuously.Itisimportant
tonotethatGovernmentofAndhraPradeshandOrissahavebanned
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
680 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

theRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(Front).TheCentralGovernment
hasdeclaredCPI(Maoist)andallitsfrontalorganisationasTerrorist
Organisation by issuing official Gazette no.954 w.e.f. 22.6.2009.
Hence, there is no need to issue separate notification by State of
MaharashtradeclaringRDFasaTerroristOrganisationorUnlawful
Association.

805] Findingofseveralletters,correspondencebymembersof
CPI(Maoist)toComradebyaccusednos.1to6tomembersofCPI
(Maoist) clearly shows that RDF is frontal organization of CPI
(Maoist).

CONSPIRACY

806] TheoffenceofcriminalconspiracyunderSection120Ais
a distinct offence. The very agreement, concert or league is the
ingredientoftheoffence.Itisnotnecessarythatalltheconspirators
mustknoweachandeverydetailoftheconspiracyaslongastheyare
coparticipatorsinthemainobjectoftheconspiracy.Theremaybeso
manydevicesandtechniquesadoptedtoachievethecommongoalof
theconspiracyandtheremaybedivisionofperformancesinthechain
of actions with one object to achieve the real end of which every
collaboratormustbeawareandinwhicheachoneofthemmustbe
interested.Theremustbeunityofobjectorpurposebuttheremaybe
pluralityofmeanssometimesevenunknowntooneanother;amongst
the conspirators. In achieving the goal several offences may be
committedbysomeoftheconspiratorsevenunknowntotheothers.
Theonlyrelevantfactisthatallmeansadoptedandillegalactsdone
must be and purported to be in furtherance of the object of the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
681 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

conspiracy even though there may be sometimes misfire or over

shootingbysomeoftheconspirators.Evenifsomestepsareresorted
tobyoneortwooftheconspiratorswithouttheknowledgeofthe
othersitwillnotaffecttheculpabilityofthoseotherswhentheyare
associatedwiththeobjectoftheconspiracy.

807] Asconspiracyistheprimarychargeagainsttheaccused,
we first advert to the law of conspiracy its definition, essential
featuresandproof.

808] Section120Adefinescriminalconspiracyasunder:
"Definition of criminal conspiracy When two or
morepersonagreetodo,orcausetobedone,
(1)Anillegalact,or
(2)Anactwhichisnotillegalbyillegalmeans,
such an agreement is designated a criminal
conspiracy:
Providedthatnoagreementexceptanagreement
tocommitanoffenceshallamounttoacriminal
conspiracyunlesssomeactbesidestheagreement
isdonebyoneormorepartiestosuchagreement
inpursuancethereof.

Explanation :Itisimmaterialwhethertheillegal
actistheultimateobjectofsuchagreement,oris
merelyincidentaltothatobject."

809] It is clear from the above noted definition of "criminal

conspiracy".thatthethreeessentialelementsofoffenceofconspiracy
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
682 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

are(a)acriminalobject,whichmaybeeithertheultimateaimofthe
agreement, or may constitute the means, or one of the means by
which that aim is to be accomplished (b) a plan or scheme
embodying means to accomplish that object (c) an agreement or
understandingbetweentwoormoreoftheaccusedpersonswhereby,
they become definitely committed to cooperate for the
accomplishment of the object by the means embodied in the
agreement, or by anyeffectualmeans.Thus,thegist ofoffence of
criminalconspiracyisanagreementtobreakthelaw.

810] Sections120Aand120Bwerebroughtonthestatutebook
by way of Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1913. Earlier to the
introductionofSections120Aand120B,conspiracypersewasnotan
offenceundertheIndianPenalCodeexceptinrespectoftheoffence
mentioned in Section 121A. In the Objects and Reasons to the
Amendment Bill, it was explicitly stated that the new provisions
(120A&B)were"designedtoassimilatetheprovisionsoftheIndian
PenalCodetothoseoftheEnglishLaw.."

811] Thus, Sections 120A & 120B made conspiracy a

substantiveoffenceandrenderedthemereagreementtocommitan
offencepunishable.Proofofacriminalconspiracybydirectevidence
isnoteasytogetandprobablyforthisreasonSection10oftheIndian
EvidenceActwasenacted.Itreadsasunder:"
Thingssaidordonebyconspiratorinreference
to common design :
Where there is reasonable
ground to believe that two or more persons have
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
683 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

conspired together to commit an offence or an

actionablewrong,anythingsaid,doneorwrittenby
anyoneofsuchpersonsinreferencetotheircommon
intention,afterthetimewhensuchintentionwasfirst
entertainedbyanyoneofthem,isarelevantfactas
againsteachofthepersonsbelievedtosoconspiring,
aswellforthepurposeofprovingtheexistenceofthe
conspiracy as for the purpose of showing that any
suchpersonwasapartytoit."

812] Thus,thesubstantivesectionoftheIndianPenalCodei.e.
Section120AadumbratedthereonSection10oftheIndianEvidence
Actgiveusthelegislativeprovisionsapplicabletoconspiracyandits
proof. After survey of the case law on the point, following legal
principles pertaining to the law of conspiracy can be conveniently
culledout:

TheApexCourtincaseof YashPalMittalv.
State of Punjab, AIR 1977 Supreme Court 2433
hasobservedthat

Theveryagreement,concertorleagueis
theingredientoftheoffence.Itisnotnecessarythat
alltheconspiratorsmustknoweachandeverydetail
oftheconspiracyaslongastheyarecoparticipators
in the main object of the conspiracy. It is not
necessary that all conspirators should agree to the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
684 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

common purpose at the same time.Theymayjoin

with other conspirators at any time before the
consummationoftheintendedobjective,andallare
equallyresponsible.Whatparteachconspiratoristo
playmaynotbeknowntoeveryoneorthefactasto
whenaconspiratorjoinedtheconspiracyandwhen
he left. There may be so many devices and
techniquesadoptedtoachievethecommongoalof
the conspiracy and there may be division of
performancesinthechainofactionswithoneobject
toachievetherealendofwhicheverycollaborator
mustbeawareandinwhicheachoneofthemmust
be interested. There must be unity of object or
purpose but there may be plurality of means
sometimes even unknown toone another,amongst
the conspirators. In achieving the goal several
offences may be committed by some of the
conspiratorsevenunknowntotheothers.Theonly
relevantfactoristhatallmeansadoptedandillegal
actsdonemustbeandpurportedtobeinfurtherance
of the object of the conspiracy even though there
maybesometimesmisfireorovershootingbysome
oftheconspirators.Evenifsomestepsareresortedto
by one or two of the conspirators without the
knowledge of the others it will not affect the
culpabilityofthoseotherswhentheyareassociated
withtheobjectoftheconspiracy.Butthentherehas
to be present mutual interest. Persons may be
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
685 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

members of single conspiracy even though each is

ignorant of the identity of many others who may
havediverseroletoplay.Itisnotapartofthecrime
ofconspiracythatalltheconspiratorsneedtoagree
toplaythesameoranactiverole.

Theunlawfulagreementwhichamounts
toaconspiracyneednotbeformalorexpress,but
may be inherent in and inferred from the
circumstances, especially declarations, acts, and
conductoftheconspirators.Theagreementneednot
beenteredintobyallthepartiestoitatthesame
time, but may be reached by successive actions
evidencing their joining of the conspiracy. Since a
conspiracyisgenerallyhatchedinsecrecy,itwould
quiteoftenhappenthatthereisnoevidenceofany
expressagreementbetweentheconspiratorstodoor
causetobedonetheillegalact.Foranoffenceunder
Section 120B,the prosecutionneednotnecessarily
provethattheperpetratorsexpresslyagreedtodoor
causetobedonetheillegalacttheagreementmay
beprovedbynecessaryimplication.Theoffencecan
be only proved largely from the inference drawn
from acts or illegal omission committed by the
conspiratorsinpursuanceofacommondesign.The
prosecution will also more often rely upon
circumstantialevidence.Itisnotnecessarytoprove
actualmeetingofconspirators.Noritisnecessaryto
prove the actual words of communication. The
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
686 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

evidenceastotransmissionofthoughtssharingthe
unlawful design is sufficient. Surrounding
circumstances and antecedent and subsequent
conduct of accused persons constitute relevant
materialtoprovechargeofconspiracy[Shivnarayan
LaxminarayanJoshiv.StateofMaharashtra,AIR
1980 Supreme Court 439 Mohammad
Usman
Mohammad Hussain Maniyar v. State of
Maharashtra,AIR1981SupremeCourt1062and
Kehar Singh v. State AIR 1988 Supreme Court
1883]

Aconspiracyisacontinuingoffenceand
continuestosubsistandcommittedwhereveroneof
theconspiratorsdoesanactorseriesofacts.Solong
as its performance continues, it is a continuing
offencetillitisexecutedorrescindedorfrustrated
bychoiceornecessity.Acrimeiscompleteassoonas
theagreementismade,butitisnotathingofthe
moment. It does not end with the making of the
agreement.Itwillcontinuesolongastherearetwo
ormorepartiestoitintendingtocarryintoeffectthe
design. Its continuance is a threat to the society
against which it wasaimedat andwouldbe dealt
withassoonasthatjurisdictioncanproperlyclaim
the power to do so. The conspiracy designed or
agreedabroadwillhavethesameeffectasinIndia,
whenpartoftheacts,pursuanttotheagreementare
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
687 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

agreed to be finalised or done, attempted or even

frustratedandviceversa.

Section10oftheEvidenceActintroducesthe
doctrineofagencyandiftheconditionslaiddown
therein are satisfied, the acts done by one are
admissible against the coconspirators. In short, the
sectioncanbeanalysedasfollows:
(1) There shall be a prima facie evidence
affordingareasonablegroundforaCourttobelieve
that two or more persons are members of a
conspiracy
(2) if the said condition is fulfilled, anything
said,doneorwrittenbyanyoneoftheminreference
totheircommonintentionwillbeevidenceagainst
theother
(3) anything said, done or written by him
shouldhavebeensaid,doneorwrittenbyhimafter
theintentionwasformedbyanyoneofthem
(4) it would also be relevant for the said
purposeagainstanotherwhoenteredtheconspiracy
whether it was said, done or written before he
enteredtheconspiracyorafterheleftit and(5)it
canonlybeusedagainstacoconspiratorandnotin
his favour [Sardar
Sardul
Singh v. State of
Maharashtra, AIR 1957 Supreme Court 747,
(2001)7SCC596]
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
688 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Conclusion

813] Toprovethechargeofcriminalconspiracy,prosecutionis
requiredtobeestablishedtwoormorepersonshaveagreedtodoor
causedtobedoneanillegalactorlegalactbyillegalmeans.There
should be intention of one accused to commit crime and joining
hands with others having the same intention. If pursuant to the
criminalconspiracytheconspiratorscommitseveraloffencesthenall
of them will be liable for offences even ifsome of them have not
activelyparticipatedinthecommissionoftheoffences.Further,there
mustbeameetingsofmindsresultinginultimatedecisiontakenby
theconspiratorsregardingthecommissionofanoffenceandwhere
thefactumofconspiracyissoughttobeinferredfromcircumstances,
the prosecution has to show that the circumstances give rise to a
conclusiveorirresistibleinferenceofanagreementbetweentwoor
morepersonstocommitanoffence.

814] Toprovetheoffenceofconspiracyagainstaccusednos.1
to 6 prosecution has relied on the documents seized from the
possessionofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkii.e.pamphlets(Art.139to
141),documentsatArt.130Aseizedfromthepossessionofaccused
no.4PrashantRahi,documentsretrievedfrom16GBmemorycardof
Sandisk company at Arts.A17 to A21 of Exh.266 seized from the
personal search of accused no.3 Hem Mishra and documents,
Photographs, VideoClipsfoundinthe electronicgadgets(Arts.1to
41)atPagenos.1to247andArts.147to164ofExh.267seizedfrom
thehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba,confessionalstatementsof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
689 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNaroteandCDRdetailsof
mobileSIMofaccusedno.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahiandno.6
Saibaba.

815] Now it is necessary to see whether the prosecution has

provedtheoffenceofconspiracyagainstaccusedno1.MaheshTirki,
no.2PanduNarote,no.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahi,no.5Vijay
Tirkiandno.6Saibabaforcommissionofoffencepunishableunder
Sections13,18,20,38,39oftheUAPAreadwithSection120BofIPC
beyondreasonabledoubt.

816] To prove this aspect the incriminating document at

Art.157foundinharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccused
no.6SaibabaunderpanchanamaExh.165needstobeconsideredat
thisstage.

817] AdocumentatArticle157foundinharddiscseizedfrom
thehousesearchofaccusedno.6SaibabatitledasJointMeetingof
AIPRFandSFPR.FromthesaiddocumentitisclearthatAIPRFand
SFPRmergedintoRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)andtothat
effectpressconferencewastakenandaccusedno.6Saibabadeclared
that AIPRF and SFPR merged into Revolutionary Democratic Front
(RDF)andneworganisationRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)
cameinexistencefrom20thMay2005andaccusedno.6Saibabais
thefounderofRDF. Therelevantportionofthesaiddocumenti.e.
ResolutionNo.1isreproducedasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
690 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Resolution:1

All the members present in the meeting

unanimouslyresolvedtounifyAIPRFandSFPRinto
one organization with a new name Revolutionary
Democratic Front (RDF). RDF shall work with a
perspectiveoftakingNewDemocraticRevolutionary
politicsintothebroadmassesofthecountrywiththe
slogans like Naxalbary Ekhi Rastha; Andhra Bihar,
Jharkhand Chattisgah Dikhata hain Ratsha and it
shallworkamongthemassesbytakingupelection
boycott in order to project the new democratic
politicalalternativeastheonlywayfortheliberation
ofthecountryandthepeoplefromimperialismand
feudalism.RDFsupportsandstrivestointegratewith
all democratic and antiimperialist struggles of
workers, peasants, women, dalits, nationalities,
adivasis,youthetc.,
th
Today, i.e. 20
May 2005, we herewith
constitute the new formation by merging both the
ECsofAIPRFandSFPRandresolvetoconstituteall
ourlowercommitteesbymergingvariousunits.

818] ThedocumentatArt.159foundinharddiscseizedfrom
thehousesearchofaccusedno.6SaibabatitledasDraftManifesto
of Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) is a manifesto of
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF).ThisDraftofRDFisprepared
byaccusedno.6Saibaba.

Fromtheabovedocumentitisclearthat accusedno.6Saibabais
founderofRDFandhehaspreparedthedraftofconstitutionofRDF.

819] The prosecution has proved is that the accused no.6

Saibabaenteredintoconspiracywithaccusedno.3HemMishraand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
691 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accused no.4 Prashant Rahi and at the instance of accused no.6

Saibaba, accused no.3 HemMishraproceededfromDelhi to forest
areaofGadchirolidistrict tomeetundergroundnaxalNarmadakka
and he left Delhi on 19.8.2013 and accused no.3 Hem Mishra
possessed 16 GB memorycard of Sandisk company containing
importanttextdocuments(Arts.A17toA21ofExh.266)whichwere
tobegivenundergroundnaxalladyNarmadakka.Thenaccusedno.3
HemMishracametoBallarshaRailwayStationwhereaccusedno.1
MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotemethimandtheytookaccused
no.3HemMishraandproceededtoforestareaGadchiroliviaAheri
and they came by bus to Aheri and when they were standing in
secludedplacenearAheribusstandtheywerecaughtbypoliceon
22.8.2013. Thepersonalsearchofaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2
PanduNaroteandno.3HemMishrawastaken.Fromthepossession
ofaccusedno.3HemMishra16GBmemorycardofSandiskcompany
alongwithotherarticleswasseized. Inthe16GBmemorycardof
SandiskcompanytheimportantdocumentisatArt.A21.Inorderto
appreciate the contention of the prosecution the said document is
againreproducedhere.

DearComrade,
RedSalutes!

Wehavesentlettersandreportsseveraltimes,
butwehavenotreceivedanyreplyinthelasteight
months.Especiallyafterthearrestofthecomrade
whowasguidingandcoordinatingwithus,wehave
notreceivedanyreply.

Thissituationhasmadeourorganisationand
manyactivitiesaroundourorganisationdifficultto
goahead.WithouttheguidanceoftheCCitismost
difficult for an all India organisation to take up
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
692 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

important steps, particularly our organisation is

playing a central role in coordinating many
activities. Now that we have announced our all
Indiaconference,itbecomesevenmoredifficultto
take many decisions without consulting you. Our
conferencehasbeenpostponedseveraltimesinthe
pastduetothearrestsandotherobstructions.This
isknowntoyou.

Wehadsentseveraltimeslettersmentioning
theissuesrelatingtointernationalrelationsandthe
problemsarosetherein.Wedontevenknowifyou
have received these letters. But we have not
receivedanyreplysofarfromyou.Wehadtaken
some decisions due to the urgency. For instance,
signing the letters that were circulated. Now we
haveameetingtotakedecisionsfurther.Wehave
beenaskingtheinternationalfraternalorganisations
towaitandsuspendallworktillwegetguidance
fromyou.Butthiscannotgolikethisformoretime.

Wehavetodecideaboutthenewbodyofour
organisation. We plead with you to arrange a
properchanneltocommunicatewithusandcallat
leasttwoamongus,whoareyoungfromamongus
tohearallthereportsandpendingissues.

We have received 1.5 lakhs once and 75

thousandatanothertimesofarafterthearrestof
the comrade. But we incurred several lakhs of
rupees on the continuous programmes and
activities.Wehaveincurredaloanof2.5lakhsasof
now.Everypassingdaybringsinnewexpenditure.
Wedocollectfundsbuttherangeofouractivitiesis
soveryhighthatwearenotinapositiontomeetall
expensesthroughcollections.

Weurgentlyneedfundsunderthefollowingheads:
Prisoner comrades health andotherlegalcharges
oncases(wearelookingafterhere):2laks.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
693 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Conference(apartfromwhatwecanbecollected):
3Lakhs.
Bookswearepublishingnow:2lakhs.
(Formorebookswecouldcollect1lakh)Butneed2
lakhsmoretopublishtheremainingbooks.
Loantobecleared:2.5lakhs.
Onearrestedseniorcomradeslifepartnerneedsat
least1lakhshere.
Forourteam(next6months)torunourselvesand
activitiesplannedweneed4lakhsatleast.
Therefore we need a minimum of 13 lakhs
immediately to meet various urgent needs and
activities.

Money apart, we need many of the important

decisions to be taken. We are in a position to
advanceonmanyfronts.Butbeforetakinganynew
step,weneedtodiscusswithyou.Werequestyou
to arrange to call these two comrades as soon as
possible.

Withrev.greetings.JadduandPrakash
1August2013.

820] Ongoingthroughtheabovedocumentitisclearthatitis
addresstoDearComradesbyJadduandPrakashanditisdated1st
August2013.Asalreadydiscussedintheearlierpartofthejudgment
Prakashisnothingbutaccusedno.6Saibaba. Thisshowsthatthe
saidletterwasaddressedbyaccusedno.6Saibabatotheunderground
naxals.Thecontentsofpara3ofthesaidlettershowsthataccused
no.6 Saibaba was communicating state of affairs of RDF to
undergroundnaxalsandinpara4ofthesaidletterfurtherreveals
thattherewasideatoformnewbodyoforganisationandtheyhad
decidedtosenttwoyoungpersons.Accordingtoprosecutionthetwo
youngpersonsmeans accusedno.3HemMishraandaccusedno.4
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
694 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Prashant Rahi who were to come forest area in Gadchiroli district

withallreportsandpendingissuesandseekingdirectionforfurther
action. Further,inpara5oftheletterdemandoftotalamountof
Rs.13lakhswasmadeformeetingexpensesondifferentheads.

821] From above letter it is clear that accused no.6 Saibaba

addressedthislettertoundergroundnaxalsandsaidletterwasbeing
carriedoutbyaccusedno.3HemMishrain16GBmemorycard.This
showsthataccusedno.6Saibabaconspiredwithaccusedno.3Hem
Mishra and accused no.4 Prashant Rahi and they both were
proceedingtoforestareaofGadchirolidistricttohavemeetingwith
underground naxals and they were found circulating the vital
informationtotheundergroundnaxals. Besidesthatthereisample
evidenceonrecordtoshowthataccusedno.3HemMishraandno.4
PrashantRahihaveconspiredwithaccusedno.6Saibabafordoing
unlawful acts and this fact is clear from the finding of several
photographsandvideoclipsofaccusedno.3HemMishraandno.4
PrashantRahiintheharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofhouse
no.6Saibaba.Further,fromtheCDRofmobileSIMcardofaccused
no.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahiandno.6Saibabaitisclearthat
theywereincontactwitheachotherandtheirlastcontactwason
18.8.2013. The letter at Art.A21 is dated 1st August 2013 and
accusedno.3HemMishrawasarrestedon22ndAugust2013.There
isproximitybetweenthedateofarrestanddateoftheletter.

822] Asalreadydiscussedtheaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiand
no.2PanduNarotehadcometoBallarsharailwaystationtoreceive
the accused no.3 Hem Mishra and they were having unique
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
695 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

identification code i.e. umbrella, newspaper spec case which were

usedbythemembersofbannedorganisationasidentificationcodeto
recognizeeachotherandthisfactisreflectedinthedocumentatpage
no.90ofExh.267havingpathExh.4/AllSai/forstudy/latest/Vanja's
Articlestakenoutfromtheharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchof
accused no.6 Saibaba titled as I am convinced the Naxalites
(Maoists)havealotofsupport inwhichitismentionedthata
newspaper and bananas helped link up with Maoists and the
CommunistPartyofIndiaMaoist(CPIMaoist).

823] Fromtheconfessionalstatementofaccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirkiandno.2PanduNaroteitisclearthatattheinstanceofnaxal
ladyNarmadakkatheyhadbeentoBallarsharailwaystationfor3/4
times to receive members of banned organisation and to have a
meeting with underground naxals. Further, from the confessional
statementsofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiitisclearthatearliertothe
incidenthehadgivenmealsandimportantthingsliketorchtothe
undergroundnaxalsandfurtherfromthepossessionofaccusedno.1
MaheshTirkithreenaxalpamphlets(Arts.139to141)wereseized.
Thisshowsthataccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarote
areactivemembersofCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDF
androleofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotewasto
receive members of banned organisation from Ballarsha railway
stationandtotakethemsafelyinforestareaofGadchirolitohave
meetingwithundergroundnaxals.

824] As reflected in para 4 of the letter Art.A21 of Exh.266

foundin16GBmemorycardseizedfromthepossessionofaccused
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
696 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

no.3HemMishrathattwoamongstthemwerecomingtohearallthe
reportsandpendingissues. Thisshowsthataccusedno.4Prashant
Rahiattheinstanceofaccusedno.6SaibabaproceededfromDelhito
Raipurtohavemeetingwithundergroundnaxalsintheforestareaof
Gadchirolidistrictandaccusedno.5VijayTirkicameatChichgadT
pointtoreceiveaccusedno.4PrashantRahifortakinghimsafelyto
the forest area of Gadchiroli district to have meeting with
underground naxal Ramdar. Finding of daily newspaper Dainik
Bhaskarinpossessionofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiandno.5Vijay
Tirkiclearlyshowthataccusedno.5VijayTirkihadcometoreceive
accusedno.4PrashantRahi.Hence,inviewofaboveitisclearthat
accusednos.1to6haveconspiredwitheachotherfordoingunlawful
acts and as such the offence of conspiracy is established by the
prosecutionagainstaccusednos.1to6.

825] Atthisjunctureitisnecessarytoconsidertheratiolaid
downbytheApexCourtincaseofYashPalMittalv.StateofPunjab,
AIR1977SupremeCourt2433whereinitisobservedthat

The very agreement, concert or league is

theingredientoftheoffence.Itisnotnecessarythatall
theconspiratorsmustknoweachandeverydetailofthe
conspiracyaslongastheyarecoparticipatorsinthe
mainobjectoftheconspiracy.Itisnotnecessarythat
allconspiratorsshouldagreetothecommonpurposeat
thesametime.Theymayjoinwithotherconspirators
atanytimebeforetheconsummationoftheintended
objective, and all are equally responsible. What part
each conspirator is to play may not be known to
everyoneorthefactastowhenaconspiratorjoinedthe
conspiracy and whenhe left.Theremay be somany
devicesandtechniquesadoptedtoachievethecommon
goal of the conspiracy and there may be division of
performancesinthechainofactionswithoneobjectto
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
697 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

achievetherealendofwhicheverycollaboratormust
be aware and in which each one of them must be
interested.Theremustbeunityofobjectorpurposebut
there may be plurality of means sometimes even
unknowntooneanother,amongsttheconspirators.In
achievingthegoalseveraloffencesmaybecommitted
by some of the conspirators even unknown to the
others. The only relevant factor is that all means
adoptedandillegalactsdonemustbeandpurportedto
beinfurtheranceoftheobjectoftheconspiracyeven
thoughtheremaybesometimesmisfireorovershooting
by some of the conspirators. Even if some steps are
resortedtobyoneortwooftheconspiratorswithout
the knowledge of the others it will not affect the
culpability of those others when they are associated
withtheobjectoftheconspiracy.Butthentherehasto
bepresentmutualinterest.Personsmaybemembersof
singleconspiracyeventhougheachisignorantofthe
identityofmanyotherswhomayhavediverseroleto
play.Itisnotapartofthecrimeofconspiracythatall
theconspiratorsneedtoagreetoplaythesameoran
activerole.

826] In view of above judgment it is not necessary that all

conspiratormustknoweachandeverydetailofconspiracyanditis
notnecessarythatallconspiratorsmustknoweachandeverydetails
of conspiracy and at the same time they may join with other
conspirators at any time before the consummation of the intended
objectiveandallareequallyresponsible.Whatparteachconspirator
istoplaymaynot beknowntoeveryoneorthefactastowhena
conspiratorjoinedtheconspiracyandwhenheleft.

827] In view of above it is necessary to see the facts of the

present case. In the present case the role of accused no.2 Pandu
Naroteandno.5VijayTirkiislimited. Theirjobwastoreceivethe
members of banned organisation and to take them safely to have
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
698 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

meetingwithundergroundnaxalinforestareaofGadchirolidistrict.
They were not knowing the details of conspiracy but they are
conspirator in the main object of conspiracy. Further it was not
necessaryfor accused no.2 Pandu Narote andno.5VijayTirkithat
theyshouldhaveagreedforthecommonpurposeatthesametime.
Theyjoinedwiththeconspiratorwithaccusedno.3HemMishra,no.4
Prashant Rahi and no.6 Saibaba after consummation of intended
objective.Eventhoughtheyareequallyliablefortheactofaccused
no.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahiandno.6Saibabathoughthey
werenotknowingwhatrolewastobeplayedbyaccusedno.3Hem
Mishra,no.4PrashantRahiandno.6Saibaba.

828] Inrespecttoaccusedno.1MaheshTirkihisrolewasnot
limited only to take the members of bannedorganisation in forest
areaofGadchirolitohavemeetingwithundergroundnaxal buthe
wasalsofoundinpossessionofthreenaxalpamphletsArt.139issued
by Bhakapa (Maowadi), (Gadchiroli Division) making allegations
against the decision of the Government to destroy the life of
Aadiwasis, Art.140 issued by Bhumkal Johar Te Dandakaryanya
Special Zonal Committee, Bhakapa (Maowadi), titled as, Amar
Shahidirku Lal Salam and pamphlet Art.141 issued by Bhartachi
CommunistParty(Maowadi),MaharashtraRajyaSamitititledas ^jk[k
lkaHkkGqu Bsok jk[k >kysY;kaph] laiyh ukgh y<kbZ vtqu [kSjykathph* and
at the end it is mentioned that ^[kSjykath gR;kdkaMkP;k lq=/kkjkauk
ikBh'kh ?kky.kkjs] iksfylka}kjs nfyrkaP;k gR;k dj.kkjs] nfyrkar ng'kr
iljfo.kkjs egkjkV 'kklu eqnkZckn !-- uotuoknh dzkafr f>ankckn* and
hepossessedthesameforcirculatingthesametoundergroundnaxals
andtopeopleinGadchirolidistricttocausethepeopletoresortfor
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
699 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

violence and to cause public disorder and to create disaffection

towardsGovernmentofMaharashtra.

829] Theaccusedno.3HemMishraattheinstanceofaccused
no.6 Saibaba proceeded from Delhi to have meeting with
underground naxals in the forest area of Gadchiroli district for
discussingimportantissuesrelatingtotheorganisationofRDFandhe
possessedthelettersintextformscontainedinelectronicgadget16
GB memorycard. Besides this there are several photographs and
videoclips showing that he had taken active part in the meetings
conductedbyRDF.

830] The accused no.4 Prashant Rahi was designated as a

memberofRDFwhennewbodywasformedon2223April,2012
andtothateffectthereisavideocliphavingpath path Exh.3/RDF
Conference video/9DVD/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01 _4. Further there are
severalvideoclipswhereinhewasseentakingpartinthemeetings
conducted by RDF. Further he was found in possession of 8
documentscontainingnaxalliterature.

831] Withrespecttoaccusedno.6Saibabathereisevidenceon
record showing that he is a founder of RDF and he drafted the
constitutionofRDF.HewasdesignatedasChiefCoordinatorbetween
CPIMaoistIndiaandfraternalorganizationsofothercountriesand
fromdocumentatpageno.210ofExh.267itisclearthatheheldpost
of Assistant Secretary, further from document at page no.119 of
Exh.267itisclearthathewasdesignatedasDeputySecretary,from
the videoclip having path Exh.3/RDF Conference
video/9DVD/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_4, it is clear that he was Joint
SecretaryofRDFandfromthedocumentatpageno.41ofExh.267
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
700 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

itisclearthatheisVicePresidentofRDF.

832] Fromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaextensive
electronicgadgets (Arts.1 to 41)CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddiscs
containingelectronicdataaround3TBintheformoftextdocuments,
videoclipsandphotographswereseizedandthesaidtextdocuments
are letters, correspondence, minutes of meetings and videoclips
relatestomeetingsofRDFandaccusedno.6Saibabaistobefound
asafounderofRDFandheisthinktankofRDForganisationand
highprofileleaderandheassistedtheorganisationinfurtheranceof
theirunlawful/terroristactivitiesasdefinedunderSection15ofUAPA
whereinpeoplehavebeenexhortedtoarmedrebellion.

TheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967

833] TerrorismisaproblemnotonlyinIndiabutalloverthe
world.InordertocombattheTerroristActivitiesforthefirsttimethe
Parliament enacted the UAPA in the year 1967. The statement of
objectsandreasonsofthatenactmentdisclosesthatthecommittee
appointed by the National Integrity Council recommended for
imposition of certain reasonable restriction on the rights of the
citizens;intheinterestofsovereigntyandintegrityofIndia(1)such
asfreedomofspeechandexpression,righttoassemblepeacefullyand
without arms and right to form associations and unions; and
accordinglytheConstitution16thAmendmentActwaspassed.Itisin
thatbackgroundthattheU.A.P.Actwasbroughtintoexistence.Inthe
preambleofthatAct,thewords"terroristactivities"wereincludedin
theyear2004.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
701 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

834] TheschemeoftheU.A.P.ActisthattheStateandCentral
Governments are conferred with the powers to declare certain
associations whose activities are found to be a threat to the
sovereigntyoftheState;asunlawful.Theactsundertakenbysuch
prohibitedassociationsaremadepunishableundertheAct.Chapters
III and IV of that Act prescribe the punishments for the offences
mentionedtherein.Thisenactmentdoesnotcontemplateanyspecial
procedure, to be followedfor trial ofthe offencesdefinedtherein,
muchlessdiditprovideforcreationofanyspecialCourts.Inother
words, the jurisdiction of the ordinary Criminal Courts functioning
undertheCodeofCriminalProcedureiskeptintactandtheordinary
procedureistobefollowed.

835] Thesaidactwasamendedfromtimetotimeasfollows:
1.TheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Amendment
Act,1969;
2.TheCriminalLaw(Amendment)Act,1986;
3.TheDelegatedLegislationProvisions(Amendment)
Act,1986;
4.The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment
Act,2004,
5.TheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Amendment
Act,2008
6.TheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Amendment
Act,2011
7.TheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Amendment
Act,2012.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
702 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

836] Communist Party of India (Maoist) and its frontal

organisation have been declared as Terrorist Organisation under
notificationno.954,dated22.06.2009issuedunderUAPA.

ArgumentofAdvocateShri.GadlingfortheaccusedonNIA

837] The learned Advocate Shri Gadling for the accused

submittedthatinthepresentcasetheoffenceisregisteredagainstthe
accusedundertheprovisionsofUAPAandtheCentralGovernment
has enacted the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 and the
offencesunderUAPAweredeclaredasascheduledoffenceinthesaid
ActandasperprovisionsofSection6ofthesaidAct,onreceiptof
informationrelatingtoanyScheduledOffencetheofficerinchargeof
the said Police Station has to forward the report to the State
GovernmentforthwithandStateGovernmentinturnhastoforward
thereport(FIR)toCentralGovernmentandtheCentralGovernment
is an competent authority to decide whether the offence is a
Scheduled Offence and it is to be investigated by N.I.A. The
provisionsofNationalInvestigationAgencyAct,2008hasbeenmade
toprotecttheinnocentpersonsbeingprosecutedforanyfalsecase
andtheprovisionsofNationalInvestigationAgencyAct,2008hasto
be read harmoniously and after registration of the offence
InvestigatingOfficerSuhas Bawche (P.W.11)hasnot forwardedthe
FIRtotheStateGovernmentandStateGovernmentinturnhasnot
forwardedthesametotheCentralGovernmentbyvirtueofprovisions
of Section 6 of National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 and the
entire investigation carried outbytheprosecutionisillegalandas
mandatory provisions as contemplated under Section 6 of the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
703 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 have not been followed,

henceseriousprejudicehasbeencausedtotheaccused.Insupportof
his submission he placed reliance on the judgment in the case of
BahadurKoravs.StateofBiharreportedin2015Cri.L.J.2134.

838] Per contra, the learned Spl. P.P. Shri Sathianathan

submittedthattheStateGovernmenthaspowertoinvestigateandfile
chargesheetthoughtheoffencepunishableunderUAPAaredeclared
asscheduledoffenceunderNationalInvestigationAct2008.

Conclusion

839] Inordertodecidewhetherthereisbreachofmandatory
provisionsandwhethertheNationalInvestigationAuthorityalonehas
powertoinvestigatetheoffenceunderUAPAwhicharedeclaredtobe
scheduledoffenceunderNationalInvestigationAct2008andwhether
the noncompliance of provisions of Section 6 of National
Investigation Act would vitiate the trial in the present case. It is
necessarytohavelookontheprovisionsofSection6of National
InvestigationAct2008whichisreproducedasunder:
6.InvestigationofScheduledOffences.
(1) On receipt of information and recording thereof
under section 154 of the Code relating to any
Scheduled Offence the officerincharge of the police
station shall forward the report to the State
Governmentforthwith.

(2)Onreceiptofthereportundersubsection(1),the
State Government shall forward the report to the
CentralGovernmentasexpeditiouslyaspossible.

(3)OnreceiptofreportfromtheStateGovernment,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
704 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

theCentralGovernmentshalldetermineonthebasisof
informationmadeavailablebytheStateGovernment
or received from other sources, within fifteen days
from the date of receipt of the report, whether the
offenceisaScheduledOffenceornotandalsowhether,
havingregardtothegravityoftheoffenceandother
relevantfactors,itisafitcasetobeinvestigatedbythe
Agency.

(4)WheretheCentralGovernmentisoftheopinion
thattheoffenceisaScheduledOffenceanditisafit
casetobeinvestigatedbytheAgency,itshalldirectthe
Agencytoinvestigatethesaidoffence.

(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in this

section, if the Central Government is of the opinion
thataScheduledOffencehasbeencommittedwhichis
requiredtobeinvestigatedunderthisAct,itmay,suo
motu,directtheAgencytoinvestigatethesaidoffence.

(6) Where any direction has been given under sub

section (4) or subsection (5) the State Government
and any police officer of the State Government
investigating the offence shall not proceed with the
investigationandshallforthwithtransmittherelevant
documentsandrecordstotheAgency.

(7) For the removal ofdoubts,it ishereby declared

thattilltheAgencytakesuptheinvestigationofthe
case,itshallbethedutyoftheofficerinchargeofthe
policestationtocontinuetheinvestigation.

840] OngoingthroughtheprovisionsofSection6ofNational
Investigation Act 2008 two eventualities are provided when the
investigationcanbetakenupbyNationalInvestigationAuthority.

I] WhentheStateGovernmentforwardthe
reporttoCentralGovernmentas
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
705 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

requiredbySection4inrespectof
scheduledoffenceand

II] When the State Government can suo

motu take investigation in respect of scheduled
offences falling under the provisions of National
InvestigationAct2008.Inthepresentcasenoneof
the above two eventualities had arisen. The
InvestigatingOfficerhasnotforwardedreportunder
Section6ofNationalInvestigationAct2008andin
turn the State Government hasnot forwarded the
same to Central Government nor the State
Governmenthassuomotutakentheinvestigationof
scheduledoffenceundertheNationalInvestigation
Act2008.

841] IntheabovereportedjudgmentincaseofBahadurKora
vs.StateofBiharreportedin2015Cri.L.J.2134 citedsupra,the
FullBenchofPatnaHighCourtinPara41observedasunder:
41. It has already been mentioned that in these
casesnotasinglestepreferabletoS.6or7were
taken either by the State Government or by the
Central Government or by the N.I.A. Therefore,
simply because an offence punishable under the
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 was
alleged, the investigation and trial of such cases
cannotbebroughtunderthepurviewoftheAct.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
706 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

842] Further, the observations made by Full Bench of Patna

HighCourtinabovecaseinparas18,19and20areimportant.These
arereproducedasunder:

18. IfonegoesbytheschemeoftheAct,themost
importantstephappenstobetheoneofentrustment
oftheinvestigationofthecasetotheN.I.R.under
subsection(5)ofS.6.Onceadecisionistakenby
the Central Government to direct the N.I.A. to
investigate the offences, the provisions of the Act
wouldapply,inthecontextofinvestigationaswell
asthetrial.

19.ThepowersoftheStateGovernment,inrespect
of such offences, is virtually subjugated. This is
evidentfromS.10,whichreadsasunder:
"10. Save as otherwise provided in this Act,
nothingcontainedinthisActshallaffectthepowers
of the State Government to investigate and
prosecute any scheduled offence or other offences
underanylawforthetimebeinginforce."

20.Areadingofthissectiondisclosesthatthe
powersoftheStateGovernmenttoinvestigateand
prosecute any scheduled offence or other offences
wouldremainintact,unlessotherwiseprovidedfor
undertheAct.Inotherwords,iftheinvestigationis
entrusted to N.I.A., the power of the State to
investigate and prosecute the scheduled offences,
ceases.

843] OngoingthroughtheprovisionsofSection10ofNational
Investigation Agency Act, 2008 if the investigation is taken up by
National Investigation Agency then the only jurisdiction of State
Governmenttoinvestigateandprosecutethescheduledoffenceunder
UAPAistakenawayandnoneoftheeventualityhasarisenhere.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
707 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

844] In view of the Judgement of Full Bench of Patna High

Court the Sessions Court has power to try the offences under the
UAPAiftheinvestigationwasdoneinpursuanceofpowerconferred
under Section 43 of UAPA when investigation is not directed by
CentralGovernmenttoStateGovernmentunderUAPA.

845] Furthertheaccusedhasnotabletoshowanyprejudice
causedtothemortooccasionoffailureofjusticehastakenplaceby
noncompliance of mandatory provisions of 6A of National
InvestigationAgencyAct,2008. Atthisjuncture,itisnecessaryto
considertheratiolaiddownbytheApexCourtinthejudgmentof
Munnalalvs.StateofU.P.reportedin1964SupremeCourt28in
whichitisobservedthat
(A) Prevention of Corruption Act (2 of 1947) ,
S.5A Provision is mandatory Investigation in
violationoftheprovisionisillegalTrialishowever
notvitiatedinabsenceofmiscarriageofjustice.

HeldthatthoughtheletterofS.5AoftheActwas
compliedwithitsspiritwasnot,forinrealitythere
wasnoinvestigationbytheofficerauthorisedunder
thatsectionandtherealinvestigationwasbyasub
inspectorofpolicewhowasneverauthorised.S.5A
ismandatoryandnotdirectoryandaninvestigation
conducted in violation thereof is illegal. Even if
howevertherewasirregularityintheinvestigation
andS.5Awasnotcompliedwithinsubstance,the
trialscouldnotbeheldtobeillegalunlessitwas
shownthatmiscarriageofjusticehadbeencaused
onaccountoftheillegalinvestigation.Therewasno
miscarriageofjusticeinthesecasesatallduetothe
irregular investigation. As a matter of fact on the
alternative case put forward by the accused the
substance of the prosecution case was practically
admitted by him and he merely pleaded certain
mitigatingcircumstances.Noobjectionwastakenat
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
708 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

thetrialwhenitbegananditwasallowedtocome
toanend.

846] In view of above the investigation of offence by State

policeinvirtueofSection37ofUAPAandfilingofchargesheetby
Sub Divisional Police Officer (P.W.21)P.W.11SuhasBawcheandby
noncompliance of mandatory provisions of Section 6(1) of the
National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, the contention of the
learnedAdvocateShriGadlingfortheaccusedtovitiatethetrialhas
noforce.

ArgumentofAdvocateShri.GadlingfortheaccusedonSec.24,25
ofUAPA

847] ThelearnedAdvocateShriGadlingfortheaccusedfurther
submittedthataccordingtotheprosecutionfromthepossessionof
accused no.3 Hem Mishra 16 GB MemoryCard was seized and
thereafter Investigating Officer P.W.11 Suhas Bawche had obtained
search warrant from the Magistrate P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas for the
housesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaandfromthehousesearchof
accusedno.6SaibabaseveralelectronicdeviceslikeCDs,DVDs,pen
drives,harddiscswereseized.Hesubmittedthatasperprovisionsof
Section24AofUAPAwhichhasbeenamendedbyUAPAintheyear
2013 the word, any property is inserted in the heading of the
ChapterVwhereanypropertywhichformproceedsofterrorismand
intended to be used for terrorism can not be seized without the
permission of Director General of Police and seizure has to be
informedwithin48hourstotheDesignatedAuthority.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
709 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

848] Hesubmittedthatonperusalofrecordandevidenceitis
clear that seizure of the property alleged to be seized from the
accusedno.3HemMishraandno.6Saibabaisnotinformedwithin48
hourstotheDesignatedAuthority.HeinvitedattentionoftheCourt
totheevidenceofP.W.11SuhasBawchewhoinhiscrossexamination
admittedthathehasnotreportedseizureofthepropertywithin48
hourstoDesignatedauthorityandexplanationgivenbyhimisthathe
thought that the articles seized were not explosive substance but
thesewereordinaryarticlesandhencehedidnotreportseizuretohis
superiorauthority.Hesubmittedthatevenifforthesakeofargument
seizureof16GBmemorycardseizedfromthepossessionofaccused
no.3HemMishrawassurprisebutthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
Saibabawaspreplanned,thatis,itwastakenaftertakingthesearch
warrant from the MagistrateP.W.12NileshwarVyas. He submitted
thatInvestigatingOfficerP.W.11SuhasBawchewantedtoplantsaid
propertyi.e.CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddiscstoshowtheseizureof
thesamefromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaandhencehe
hasnotfollowedthemandatoryprovisionsofSection24and25of
UAPAandassuchseriousprejudicehasbeencausedtotheaccused.
Onabovetwogroundsprosecutionlaunchedagainsttheaccusedhas
tobedropped.

Conclusion

849] In order to decide this controversy it is necessary to

considertheprovisionsofChapterVandSection25ofUAPAwhich
arereproducedasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
710 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ChapterV

Forfeiture of Proceeds of Terrorism [or any

PropertyIntendedtobeUsedForTerrorism]
Section25ofUAPA Powersofinvestigating
officerandDesignatedAuthorityandappealagainst
orderofDesignatedAuthority.
(1) If an officer investigating an offence
committed under Chapter IV or Chapter VI, has
reason to believe that any property in relation to
whichaninvestigationisbeingconducted,represents
proceeds of terrorism, he shall, with the prior
approval in writing of the Director General of the
PoliceoftheStateinwhichsuchpropertyissituated,
makeanorder seizingsuchpropertyandwhereit
is not practicable to seize such property, make an
orderofattachmentdirectingthatsuchpropertyshall
not be transferred or otherwise dealt with except
withthepriorpermissionoftheofficermaking
suchorder,or of the Designated Authority before
whom the property seized or attached is produced
andacopyofsuchordershallbeservedontheperson
concerned.

(2)Theinvestigatingofficershalldulyinform
theDesignated Authority within fortyeight hours
oftheseizureorattachmentofsuchproperty.

(3)TheDesignatedAuthoritybeforewhomthe
seized or attached property is produced shall either
confirmorrevoke the order of seizure or
attachment so issued within a period of sixty days
fromthedateofsuchproduction:

Provided that an opportunity of making a

representationbythepersonwhosepropertyisbeing
seizedorattachedshallbegiven.

(4)Inthecaseofimmovablepropertyattached
bytheinvestigatingofficer,itshallbedeemedtohave
beenproducedbeforetheDesignatedAuthority,when
theinvestigatingofficernotifieshisreportandplaces
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
711 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

itatthedisposaloftheDesignatedAuthority.

(5) The investigating officer may seize and

detainanycashtowhichthisChapterappliesifhe
hasreasonablegroundsfor
suspectingthat

(a)itisintendedtobeusedforthepurposesof
terrorism;or

(b)itformsthewholeorpartoftheresourcesof
aterroristorganisation:

Providedthatthecashseizedunderthissubsectionby
the investigating officer shall be released within a
periodoffortyeight hoursbeginningwiththetime
whenitisseizedunlessthematterinvolvingthecash
isbeforetheDesignatedAuthorityandsuchAuthority
passesanorderallowingitsretentionbeyondforty
eighthours.

Explanation.
For the purposes of this subsection, cash
means
(a)coinsornotesinanycurrency;
(b)postalorders;
(c)traveller'scheques;
(ca)creditordebitcardsorcardsthatservea
similarpurpose;
(d)banker'sdrafts;and
(e)suchothermonetaryinstrumentsasthe
CentralGovernmentor,asthecasemaybe,
theStateGovernmentmayspecifybyanorder
madeinwriting.

(6)Anypersonaggrievedbyanordermadeby
theDesignatedAuthoritymaypreferanappeal
to thecourtwithinaperiodof thirtydays
fromthedateofreceiptoftheorder,and the
court may either confirm the order of
attachmentofpropertyorseizuresomadeor
revokesuchorderandreleasetheproperty.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
712 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

850] Ongoingthroughtheaboveprovisions,itisclearthatthe
seized property should be proceeds of terrorism or such property
whichisintendedtobeusedforterrorism. Ongoingthroughthe
provisionsofSection25ofUAPAitrevealsthatthewordpropertyis
usedsometimewithrespecttocash,currencynote,cheques,banker's
drafts. This means the property which is intended to be used for
terrorisminviewofSection25(5)(a)havingsomevalueinmoney
thenonlyprovisionsofSection25ofUAPAgotattractedwhichcould
beusedforterrorismandwiththehelpofthistheterroristactwould
bedone.Inthepresentcase,thepropertyseizedis16GBmemory
card,newspapers,railwayplatformtickets,umbrella,CDs,DVDs,pen
drives, harddiscs etc. which can not be considered as a property
whichwouldbeproceedsofterrorismoranypropertyintendedtobe
usedforterrorism. Hence,thecontentionofthelearnedAdvocate
Shri Gadling for the accused that provisions of Section 25 are
applicable in this case have no force and cannot be taken into
consideration andthesaid propertylike 16GB memorycard,CDs,
DVDs,pendrives,harddiscsetc.cannotbeconsideredasaproperty
proceedsofterrorismandpropertyintendedtobeusedforterrorism.
These electronic gadgets were used by the members of banned
organization CPI (Maoist and RDF) as a mode of communication
betweenthemandtheseelectronicgadgetscannotbeconsiderasa
proceedsofterrorism.

ArgumentsofAdv.ShriGadlingfortheaccused
onSec.43,43A,43B&UAPA.

851] The learned Advocate Shri Gadling for the accused

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
713 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

vehementlyarguedthatthemandatoryprovisionsofSection43,43A
and43BofUAPAhavenotbeenfollowedandthereisanillegalityin
carrying out the investigation and that itself vitiate the trial. He
submittedthattheaccusedno.1Mahesh,no.2Panduandno.3Hem
Mishra were arrested by PSI Atul Avhad (P.W.6) and FIR was
registered by station diary incharge of Police Station, Aheri ASI
NarendraDube (P.W.15). Thepersonalsearchoftheaccusedno.1
Mahesh, no.2 Pandu and no.3 Hem Mishra was taken by Police
Inspector AnilBadgujar(P.W.10)whoisnot aPolice Officerinthe
rankofDeputySuperintendentofPoliceorequivalentofhisrank.It
wasarguedthatmandatoryprovisionsofSection43,43Aand43Bof
UAPA have not been compliedandonthispoint itselfaccusedare
entitledforacquittal.

Conclusion

852] InthepresentcasefromtheevidenceofPSIAtulAvhad
(P.W.6),PIAnilBadgujar(P.W.10),ASINarendraDubey(P.W.15)and
panch witness P.W.1 Santosh Bawne it reveals that accused no.1
Mahesh,no.2Panduandno.3HemMishrawerefoundinsuspicious
circumstancesatsecludedplacenearAheribusstandandoninquiry
with them by Police Officer PSI Atul Avhad (P.W.6) they gave
unsatisfactoryanswershencetheywerearrestedandtheyweretaken
to Police Station, Aheri and their personal search was taken in
presence of panch witness Santosh Bawne (P.W.1) and from the
possessionofaccusedno.1Mahesh,incriminatingarticlesi.e.three
naxal pamphlets (Arts.139 to 141), platform ticket of Ballarsha
railwaystationdated28.5.2013werefoundandfromthepossession
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
714 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

of accused no.2 Pandu, incriminating articles platform ticket of

Ballarsha railwaystation, newspaperandumbrellawerefoundand
from the possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra incriminating
articles16GBmemorycardofSandisccompany,railwayticketfrom
DelhitoBallarsha,Saharanewspaperwerefound.Fromtheevidence
ofPIAnilBadgujar(P.W.10)itrevealsthatafterthatastheoffenceis
falling under UAPA the investigation was handedover to Deputy
SuperintendentofPoliceP.W.11SuhasBawche.Inordertodealwith
thecontroversyposedbydefencecounselShriGadling,itisnecessary
tohavelookontheprovisionsofSection43,43Aand43BofUAPA.
Section43,43Aand43Barereproducedasunder:

Sec.43] Officers competent to investigate

offences under Chapters IV and VI Notwithstanding
anythingcontainedintheCode,nopoliceofficer,

(a) in the case of the Delhi Special Police

Establishment, constituted under subsection (1) of
section2oftheDelhiSpecialPoliceEstablishmentAct,
1946, (25 of 1946), below the rank of a Deputy
Superintendent of Police or a police officer of
equivalentrank
(b) in the metropolitan areas of Mumbai,
Kolkata, Chennai andAhmedabad and any other
metropolitanareanotifiedassuchundersubsection
(1) of section 8 of the Code, below the rank of
anAssistantCommissionerofPolice;
(c) in any case not relatable to clause (a) or
clause(b),belowtherankofaDeputySuperintendent
ofPoliceorapoliceofficerofanequivalentrank,shall
investigateanyoffencepunishableunderChapterIVor
ChapterVI.

43A.Powertoarrest,search,etc.Anyofficer
oftheDesignatedAuthorityempoweredinthisbehalf,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
715 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

bygeneralorspecialorderoftheCentralGovernment
ortheStateGovernment,asthecasemaybe,knowing
ofadesigntocommitanyoffenceunderthisActor
has reason to believe from personal knowledge or
informationgivenbyanypersonandtakeninwriting
thatanypersonhascommittedanoffencepunishable
underthisActorfromanydocument,articleorany
other thing which may furnish evidence of the
commission of such offence or from any illegally
acquired property or any document or other article
which may furnish evidence of holding any illegally
acquired property which is liable for seizure or
freezing or forfeiture under this Chapter is kept or
concealedinanybuilding,conveyanceorplace,may
authoriseanyofficersubordinatetohimtoarrestsuch
apersonorsearchsuchbuilding,conveyanceorplace
whetherbydayorbynightorhimselfarrestsucha
person or search a such building, conveyance or
place.]

43B.Procedureofarrest,seizure,etc
(1)Anyofficerarrestingapersonundersection
43Ashall, as soon as may be, inform him of the
groundsforsucharrest.
(2) Every person arrested and article seized
under section 43A shall be forwarded without
unnecessary delay to the officer in charge of the
nearestpolicestation.
(3)Theauthorityorofficertowhomanyperson
or article is forwarded under subsection (2) shall,
with all convenient dispatch, take such measures as
maybenecessaryinaccordancewiththeprovisionsof
theCode.]

853] On perusal of above provisions it reveals that under

Section 43 of UAPA, Deputy Superintendent of Police or a Police
Officer of equivalent rank is designated as competent person to
investigateoffenceunderUAPA.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
716 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

854] On perusal of Sections 43A and 43B which were

introducedbywayofamendmenttotheUAPAw.e.f.31.12.2008any
officer of the designated authority empowered in that behalf by
general or special order of the Central Government and State
Government were declared to be competent person to investigate,
arrestandmakesearchandseizureinthecase.
Under Section 2(d) the definition ofDesignatedAuthority isgiven
whichisreproducedasunder:
Section2 (d) Designated Authority meanssuch
officerofthecentralgovernmentnotbelowtherank
ofjointSecretarytothatgovernment,orsuchofficer
of the state government not below the rank of
secretarytothatgovernment,asthecasemaybe,as
maybespecifiedbythecentralgovernmentorthe
state government, by notification published in the
officialgazette.

855] TheprovisionsofSection43Aand43Baredifferentfrom
Section 43 where Deputy Superintendent of Police is Designated
AuthorityasacompetentpersontoinvestigateoffenceunderUAPA.
ThefactsinthecaseinhandarethatinthemonthofAugust2013,
API Atul Avhad (P.W.6) attached to Special Branch, Gadchiroli got
secretinformationthataccusedno.1Maheshandno.2Panduwere
workingforprohibitedbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist),hencethey
startedkeepingwatchontheiractivitiesandon22.8.2013accused
no.1Mahesh,no.2Pandualongwithaccusedno.3HemMishrawere
foundinsuspiciouscircumstancesatsecludedplacenearbusstand,
Aheri hence API Atul Avhad (P.W.6) arrested them and they were
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
717 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

takentoPoliceStation,AheriandinpresenceofpanchwitnessP.W.1
SantoshBawneandPIAnilBadgujar(P.W.10)personalsearchofeach
accused was taken and from their personal search incriminating
articles were seized under panchanama (Exh.137) and FIR was
registered at Aheri Police Station by PI P.W.10 Anil Badgujar and
thereafter further investigation was handedover to Investigating
OfficerP.W.11DeputySuperintendentofPoliceSuhasBawchewhois
empowered to investigate the offence under UAPA by virtue of
provisionsofSection43ofUAPA.Hence,merelybecausetheoffefnce
wasregisteredbyPoliceInspectorP.W.10AnilBadgujarandhetook
personal searchof accusednos.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNarote
andno.3HemMishraandpreparedpanchanamaExh.137thatisnot
agroundtovitiatethetrialinthiscase.Atthisstage,itisnecessary
toconsidertheratiolaiddownbyAndhraPradeshHighCourtinthe
judgmentof AkulaBhoomaiah.v.StateofA.P.reportedin2013
CRI.L.J.1198inwhichitisheldthat

(A) UnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act(37of
1967), S.43 Charges of supporting terrorist
organizationRegistrationofcrimebyInspectorof
Police Validity Plea raised by accusedpersons
that officer of rank of A.C.P. was prescribed for
purposesofinvestigationbyvirtueofS.43Not
tenableCrimewasonlydetectedandreportedby
InspectorNofurtherinvestigationwastakenupby
Inspector Thus, registration of crime did not
offendS.43ofAct.(Para4)

856] Further, in view of the judgment of Apex Court in the

judgmentofMunnalalvs.StateofU.P.reportedin1964Supreme
Court 28 cited supra the trial is not vitiated if some part of the
investigation was not conducted by officer of rank of SDPO as
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
718 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

envisagedunderSection43ofUAPA.

857] ItistobenotedthatbyvirtueofprovisionofSec.43Cof
UAPA, Deputy Superintendent of Police is competent to investigate
anyoffence punishableunderchapterIVandVIofUAPA. Atthis
juncture,itisnecessarytoconsidertheobservationoffullBenchof
Patna High Court in the case of Bahadur Kora V.State of Bihar,
reported in 2015, CRI.L.J.2134, para 46B of this judgment is
reproducedasunder

46BWethereforeholdthatthecasesevenwhere
offencespunishableundertheprovisionsofU.A.P.A.
areallegedshallbetriedbytheCourtsasprovided
forundertheCr.P.C.andnotinaccordancewiththe
specialprocedure,undertheActunless

(i)theinvestigationofsuchcasesisentrusted
bytheCentralGovernmenttotheN.I.A.and
(ii)theN.I.A.transfersthesametothe
investigatingagencyofStateGovernment.

858] In view of this the investigation carried out by SDPO

SuhasBawcheislegalandproperandthisCourthasjurisdictionto
trythepresentcaseforoffenceunderUAPA,asinvestigationwasnot
interestedtoN.I.A.byCentralGovernmentandN.I.A.didnottransfer
toStateGovernment. Hence,thereisnosubstanceinthedefence
argumentthatinvestigationisnotcarriedoutbycompetentofficer
andthetrialisnotvitiatedonthispoint.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
719 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

859] Now,itisnecessarytoseewhethertheprosecutionhas
establishedthecaseagainstaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2Pandu
Narote,no.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahi,no.5VijayTirkiand
no.6Saibabaandwhatingredientsoftheoffencespunishableunder
Section13ofUAPAreadwithSection120BoftheIPCareattracted
againstthem.

ArgumentofShriGadlingAdvocatefortheaccusedonSection13
ofUAPA

860] The learned Advocate Shri Gadling for the accused

submittedthatSection13ofUAPAdealswiththeactivitiescarriedby
unlawful association. Section 3 of UAPA deals with unlawful
associationandChapter6ofUAPAdealswithterroristorganisation.
There is difference between organisation and association and CPI
(Maoist)andRDFareorganizationandnotassociationandSection
13ofUAPArelatestounlawfulassociationandhencethecontention
ofthedefenceisthattheingredientsofSection13oftheActarenot
attractedandsanctioncouldnothavebeengrantedforprosecution
underSection13oftheUAPA.Thisshowsthatsanctionwasgranted
without application of mind. He submitted that there is no
notificationtothateffectissuedbytheCentralGovernmentu/s3of
UAPA.DeclaringRDFisaanunlawfulassociation.

861] Therelatedprovisionsarereproducedasunder:
Sec.13Punishmentforunlawfulactivities(1)
Whoever
(a)takespartinorcommits,or
(b) advocates, abets, advises or incites the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
720 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

commission of, any unlawful activity, shall be

punishablewithimprisonmentforatermwhichmay
extendtoseven years, and shall also be liable to
fine.
(2)Whoever,inanyway,assistsanyunlawful
activityof any association declared unlawful
under section 3, after the notification by which it
hasbeensodeclaredhasbecome effective under
subsection(3)ofthatsection,shallbe punishable
withimprisonmentforatermwhichmayextendto
fiveyears,orwithfine,orwithboth.
(3)Nothinginthissectionshallapplytoany
treaty,agreement or convention entered into
between the Government of India and the
Government of any other country or to any
negotiations therefor carried on by any person
authorised in this behalf by the Government of
India.
2.Definitions.
(1) In this Act,unlessthe context otherwise
requires,:

(o) "unlawful activity, in relation to an

individualor association, means any action
takenbysuchindividualor association (whether
bycommittinganactorbywords,eitherspokenor
written,orbysignsorbyvisiblerepresentationor
otherwise),

(i)whichisintended,orsupportsanyclaim,
to bring about, on any ground whatsoever, the
cession of a part of the territory of India or the
secessionofapartoftheterritoryofIndiafromthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
721 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Union,or whichincitesanyindividualorgroupof
individualstobringaboutsuchcessionorsecession;
or

(ii) whichdisclaims,questions,disruptsoris
intended to disrupt the sovereignty and territorial
integrityofIndia;or

(iii) which causes or is intended to cause

disaffectionagainstIndia;

(p) "unlawful association means any

association,

(i) which has for its object any unlawful

activity, or which encourages or aids persons to
undertake any unlawful activity, or of which the
membersundertakesuchactivity; or

(ii) which has for its object any activity

whichispunishable under section 153A or
section153BoftheIndianPenalCode(45of1860),
orwhichencouragesoraidspersonstoundertake
any such activity, or of which the members
undertakeanysuch activity:

Providedthatnothingcontainedinsub
clause (ii) shall apply tothe State of Jammu and
Kashmir;

862] In order to see whether the ingredients of the offence

punishableunderSection13ofUAPAareestablished,itisnecessary
to scrutinize the documents seized from the possession of accused
no.1 Mahesh Tirki i.e. naxal pamphlets (Art. 139 to 141), text
documents Arts.A17 to A21 retrieved from 16 GB memorycard of
Sandisk company seized from the personal search of accused no.3
Hem Mishra and documents,photographs,videoclipsfoundinthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
722 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

electronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)atPagenos.1to247andArts.147to
164ofExh.267seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba
broughtonrecordbytheprosecution.

863] FromthedocumentatArt.157,itisclearthatmembersof
AIPRF and SFPR merged into one organization with a new name
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)shallworkwithaperspective
of taking New Democratic Revolutionary politics into the broad
massesofthecountrywiththesloganslike NaxalbaryEkhiRastha;
AndhraBihar,JharkhandChattisgahDikhatahainRatsha anditshall
work among the masses by taking up election boycott in order to
projectthenewdemocraticpoliticalalternativeastheonlywayfor
the liberation of the country andthepeople fromimperialismand
feudalism and RDF supports and strives to integrate with all
democratic and antiimperialist struggles of workers, peasants,
women,dalits,nationalities,adivasis,youthetc.

864] The document at page no.17 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.22/recoveredfolder/folder003,titledasReviewofRDFwork
sinceitsFormation,showsthatinthepresentsituation,itisalmost
impossibletoprovideanyreformorrelieftothemassesthroughthe
parliamentarysystem.(evenifitmakereformpossible,itshouldbe
rejected) Even the process of judiciary is not consistent with the
provisionsoftheIndianConstitution.Hence,fromthesaiddocument
it reveals that there is mention of rejection of parliamentary
democracy which shows the disaffection against the Central
GovernmentandStateGovernmentestablishedbylaw.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
723 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

865] On perusal of contents of pamphlet Art.139 issued by

Bhakapa (Maowadi), (Gadchiroli Division) shows that there was
oppose to the policies of the Government which were being
implemented in the Gadchiroli district i.e. implementation of
SurjagadProjectandGreenHuntOperationshowshatredtowardsthe
GovernmentandonperusalofcontentsofpamphletArt.141itreveals
that it was published by Bhartachi Communist Party (Maowadi),
MaharashtraRajyaSamitititledas ^jk[k lkaHkkGqu Bsok jk[k >kysY;kaph]
laiyh ukgh y<kbZ vtqu [kSjykathph* andattheenditismentioned
that ^[kSjykath gR;kdkaMkP;k lq=/kkjkauk ikBh'kh ?kky.kkjs] iksfylka}kjs
nfyrkaP;k gR;k dj.kkjs] nfyrkar ng'kr iljfo.kkjs egkjkV 'kklu
eqnkZckn !-- uotuoknh dzkafr f>ankckn* andappealedpeopletoprotest
Maharashtra Government and accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki found
circulating the information to the underground naxals and found
inciting people and abetting the people for violence by spreading
disaffectionagainsttheGovernment.

866] Invideocliphavingpath Exh.3/films/s1/RDF/3/VIDEO

_TS/VTS_01_3, in the harddisc seized from the house search of
accusedno.6Saibaba itisseenthatthedignitariesfromdifferent
parts including accused no.6 G.N. Saibaba are seen on dais and
speakingaboutTelanganaandgivingacalltogivebloodforcreation
ofTelangana. Fromthisvideoitisclearthataccusedno.6Saibaba
wasincitingthepeopletogivebloodforcreationofTelanganaand
thisshowsthattheyareinstigatingthepeopletofightandtowage
waragainsttheGovernmentshowingdisaffectionandthisfactisalso
clearfromthedocumenti.e.PressReleaseatPageno.210ofExh.267
titled as Revolutionary DemocraticFront (RDF), the first allIndia
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
724 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Conference on 2223 April, 2012 held at Hyderabad, Telangana

foundintheharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6
Saibaba.

867] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF/4/VIDEO
_TS/VTS_01_2, accused no.6 Saibaba is seen in RDF conference
sayingthattheRDFcompletely rejecttheparliamentarysystem and
use of parliamentary system and its electoral system and further
stated that RDFmanifestoclearlyestablishesthat thisorganization
thinksthatnaxalvadichangethefaceofthepoliticsofthiscountry,
the politics of Indians of continent will remain the same after
naxalbariapprisinghappened,sonaxalvadiekhiraasta,naxalvadiis
onlywayisthecentralsloganaspertheRDF andotherstatements
regardingnaxalbari.Contentsofthislettershowsthataccusedno.6
SaibabaisnotonlyopposingtheGovernmentbutsupportingforthe
implementationofRDFmanifestocontendingthereinthatnaxalbari
Ek Hi Rasta and it is clear that RDF has rejected the use of
parliamentary system and its electoral system by promoting and
propagatingcommunistideologyandaccusedno.6Saibabahastaken
active part to strengthen the people in the RDF organisation by
showingdisaffectiontowardstheGovernmentofIndia.

868] In the videoclip having path Exh.3/films/s1/

RDF/2/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1accusedno.6Saibabaisseenspeaking
aboutthekashmiripeoples'struggleforfreedomofKashmirandgave
assurancethatRDFisnotonlysupportingthemovementbuttakes
activepartandtheir mainconcernis toliberatetheKashmirfrom
IndiaandfurtherhestatedthatthestruggleforliberationofKashmir
andliberationofRDFarethesame.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
725 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

869] In the videoclip having path Exh.3/films/s1/RDF /

2/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1,accusedno.6Saibabawasseenondiasand
accused no.4 PrashantRahiwassittingintheaudience whereone
ladywasshoutingslogansdemandingreturnofArmyfromKashmir
and for liberation of Kasmir and accused no.4 Prashant Rahi is
respondingtotheslogans.

870] Aphotographatpageno.36ofExh.267takenoutfrom
the harddisc Exh.3 seized from the house search of accused no.6
Saibaba having path Exh.3/new folder (2)/all metters I/photos/
11.5.07, is aposterinwhichitiswrittenthatFreefor Kashmir,
Nagalim,Manipur,Assam,Eelum,Palestine.

871] Accordingtodefencethereisnothingonrecordtoshow
that the CPI (Maoist) and its frontal orgainzation RDF is banned.
However, the Apex Court in the case of Redaul Husain Khan v.
National Investigation Agency reported in 2010(1) SCC 521
whereinitisheldthatmerelybecauseanorganizationhasnotbeen
declared as an unlawful association it cannot be said that said
organization could not have indulged in terrorist activities. Hence,
nondeclaration of organization as banned does not fatal to the
prosecution.

872] Fromtheabovetextdocuments,videoclips,photographs
andArts.139to141seizedfrompossessionofaccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirrkiandtheprincipleunderlinedundertheoffenceofconspiracy
accused nos.1 to 6 have committed offence punishable u/s 13 of
UAPA read with 120B IPC as accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.6
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
726 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Saibaba found showing their disaffection towards Government of

IndiaandStateofMaharashtra.

ArgumentofAdvocateShriGadlingfortheaccusedonSection18
ofUAPA
873] The learned Advocate Shri Gadling for the accused
submitted that even assuming for the sake of argument that some
speeches made by accused persons but in pursuance of the said
speechesnoovertactwasdoneandthesaidspeecheswerenotmade
with intention to create disorder or incite the people for violence.
Hence,provisionsofSection18and20ofUAPAarenotapplicablein
thiscase.Insupportofhissubmissionheplacedrelianceinthecase
of BalwantSinghvs.StateofPunjabreportedin(1995)3SCC
214,whereinitisheldthat
A.PenalCode,1860Ss.124Aand153A
ApplicabilityRaisingofcertaincasualslogansby
twoindividualsacoupleoftimeswithoutanyother
overt act and without any intention to create
disorderortoincitepeopletoviolencePeoplein
general not affected by such slogans and they
carried on with their normal activities Held, in
facts and circumstances of the case, Ss.124A or
153Anotattracted.

874] HefurtherplacedrelianceinthecaseofStateofBiharvs.
Smt.ShailabalareportedinAIR1952SC329 whereinitisheld
that
Aleaflet,entitledSangramorstruggle,was
written in highflown Bengali prose with a large
mixtureofpoeticexpressionsborrowedatrandom
from the writings of some wellknown poets of
Bengal.Theobjectofthewritingasfarascouldbe
gathered from the leaflet was to give a poetic or
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
727 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

idealisticpictureofwhatismeantandconnotated
by 'struggle' or revolution. The aim and end of
'struggle',asstatedintheleaflet,wastowipeout
oppression,injusticeorwrongwhichispervading
allovertheworldfromthepasttothefuture,andit
wasonlyafterallwrongs,injusticeandoppression
haveperishedthatanewworldwouldbebuiltup.
Held that in the absence of any evidence
whatsoever for connecting the leaflet with any
agitationormovementatthetimeitwaswrittenin
thelocalityandinthefaceofthefailureoftheState
Government to prove the attendant circumstances
and the actual background of the publication it
could not be held that the leaflet fell within the
mischief of S.4(1)(a) and that no security order
could be passed against the keeper of the press
underthatSection.

875] Now it is necessary tosee whetherthe prosecution has

provedthecaseagainstaccusedfortheoffencepunishableu/s18of
UAPA.Section18ofUAPAisreproducedasunder:

876] Sec.18.
Punishment for conspiracy, etc. Whoever
conspires or attempts to commit, or advocates, abets, advises or
incites,directsorknowinglyfacilitatesthecommissionof,aterrorist
actoranyactpreparatorytothecommissionofa terroristact,shall
bepunishablewithimprisonmentforatermwhichshallnotbeless
thanfiveyearsbutwhichmayextendtoimprisonmentforlife,and
shallalsobeliabletofine.

877] The learned Advocate Shri Gadling for the accused has
relied on the judgment of Balwant Singh vs. State of Punjab
reported in (1995) 3 SCC 214, wherein the Apex Court while
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
728 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

dealingwithSection124AoftheIndianPenalCodehasobservedthat
thecasualsloganbyindividualswithoutanyintentiontocommitthe
crimeorviolentactivitieswouldnotentailpenalconsequencesu/s
124A of IPC. So far as applicability of the ratio laid down by
Honourable Apex Court in the Balwant's case (cited supra) to the
presentcaseisconcerned,itwouldbepropertointerpretArticle19of
theConstitutionofIndiainitscorrectperspective.Itmustbenoted
thatArticle19oftheConstitutionofIndiaprovidesRighttoFreedom
ofSpeechandExpressionandtoformassociationtoonlycitizensof
India and to the Members of registered Political Parties. It is
important to note that the preamble and object of Prevention of
Unlawful(Activities)Act,1967istoputreasonablerestrictionsonthe
'RighttoFreedomofSpeechandExpression'andtoformassociation
and organisation on the terrorist acts and that is why the Central
GovernmenthasenlistedCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationlike
RDF as terrorist organisation w.e.f.22.6.2009. Ifright offreedom
guaranteedunderArticle19oftheConstitutionofIndiaisallowedto
beextendedtotheseterroristorganisationsthenitwoulddefeatthe
veryobjectofPreventionofUnlawful(Activities)Act,1967.Hence,
accused nos.1 to 6 who are involved in the terrorist activities
perpetrated by banned organisation CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organisation RDF can not claim right to freedom of speech and
expression and to form association under Article 19 of the
ConstitutionofIndia,whichisavailabletoordinarycitizenofIndiaor
members of registered political parties and not to the members of
terrorists organization and they cannot claim the said right in the
capacityofterroristsorganization.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
729 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

878] Atthisstageitisnecessarytoconsidertheratiolaiddown
inthejudgmentofAsitKumarSenGuptavStateofChhattisgarh
in2012,Cri.L.J.(NOC)384(Chh):MANU/CG/0622/2011wherein
itisobservedthat

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act ( 37 of

1967),Ss.18,39(2)ChargeofSeditionProof
Accused foundexcitingandencouragingpeopleto
wage war against the Government by armed
rebellion Loads of naxal literature seized from
possession of accused Accused used to invite
people to join CPI (ML) People War and CPI
(Maoist)organizationsConvictionofaccusedfor
offenceschargedproper.

879] ThefactsofthecasearethattheaccusedAsitKumarSen
Guptaisappellantandwaschargedfortheoffencespunishableunder
SectionunderSection124AoftheIPC;underSections8(1),8(3)&
8(5)oftheChhattisgarhVishesh JansurakshaAdhiniyam,2005(for
shorttheActof2005)andunderSection18&39(2)oftheUnlawful
Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short the Act of 1967) as
amendedbytheActof2004.

880] Theallegationsagainsttheappellantwasthatheusedto
Theappellantusedtovisitthepeopleandusedtoinciteandprovoke
them to join Communist Party of India (Maoist) to bring a
GovernmentheadedbyMaoistbythrowingoutthepresentcapitalist
Government by armed rebellion. He used to brief them about the
naxalactivitieswhileopposingtheGovernmentestablishedbylaw.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
730 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

881] The appellant was livingin tenant premisesandduring

investigationthehouseoftheappellantwassearchedandfromhis
house extensive naxal literature in the form of letters written by
members of banned organization to their Comrades starting with
wordsRedSalute,minutesofmeeting,pointsofdebateinmeeting,
letters by the General Secretary to its comrades, louding of
Terrorist/Naxal/Maoist activities in India, the ultimate goal of
maoist/NaxalofwrestingpowersofrevolutionarymeansinIndia,the
ultimate goal of maoist/Naxal of wresting powers of revolutionary
meansinIndiawereseized. FurthercomputerandCPUwerealso
seizedfromthehousesearchoftheappellantandsaidcomputerand
CPU were sent to Forensic Laboratory, Hyderabad. From the said
computer and CPU belonging to appellant Forensic Laboratory,
Hyderabadretrieveddataandtranscriptwasavailableforthis. Itis
necessarytoreproduceparano.56and57ofthisjudgment:
56. InVolumeIIIofthepaperbookswhichhave
beenpreparedfromthematerialstoredintheCPU
ofthecomputerbelongingtotheappellant,minutes
of special conference of CPI (ML) Peoples War is
available. The document contains views of the
delegatesandformationofnewCentralCommittee.
ItspeaksofmilitarystrategyorpathoftheIndian
Revolutionwhichisthepathofprotractedpeoples
war i.e. liberating the countryside first through
areawise seizure of power, establishing guerrilla
zonesandbaseareasandthenencirclingthecities
andfinallycapturingpowerthroughoutthecountry.
ThedocumentfurtherdeclaresItshouldbepointed
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
731 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

out that destruction of the enemy is the primary

object of war and selfpreservation the secondary,
because only by destroying the enemy in large
numbers can one effectively preserve oneself.
Thereforeattack,thechiefmeansofdestroyingthe
enemy, is primary,while defence,asupplementary
meansofdestroyingtheenemyandameansofself
preservation, is secondary. In actual warfare the
chiefroleisplayedbydefencemuchofthetimeand
byattackfortherestofthetime,butifwaristaken
asawhole,attackremainsprimary.Thisdocument
isatpage706ofVolumeIIIofthepaperbooks.At
page716,listofmartyrsofthepeopleswarofNepal
is provided. Elsewhere in the volume, support
provided by the CPI (ML) Peoples War and MCC
fromIndiahasbeengreetedbythebannedNepali
Maoist.
57.VolumeVofthepaperbooksistranscriptofthe
materialbytheCentralForensicLaboratorystoredin
theCPUfoundfromthepossessionoftheappellant
which contains the documents regarding building
anddevelopmentofPeoplesGuerillaArmyinIndia
atpage 1102.ThepressreleaseissuedbytheCPI
(Maoist) on 4122004 is available at page 1138.
This press release has been issued by Ganapati,
GeneralSecretary,CentralCommittee(Provisional)
ofCPI(Maoist).ThenameofthisGanapatiisfound
in two other letters which this Court has already
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
732 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

discussedintheprecedingpartofthisjudgment.At
page 1141 of Volume V of the paper books, the
details of meeting of the Joint Central Committee
heldinSeptember,2004isprovidedandthepoints
of differences for the debate in the forth coming
CongressoftheCPI(Maoist)havebeenhighlighted.
Thisdocumentisdated10102005.Elsewherealso,
theactivities,minutes,pointsofdebateetc.ofthe
meetingofCPI(Maoist),aterroristorganizationas
also a banned organization are contained in this
volume.Inmostofthedocuments,therevolutionary
pathundertakenbytheMaoistwhicharepopularly
known as Naxalites waging Guerrilla war in the
interior forest areas of the State has been
appreciated and louded. The appellant claims
himselftobeawriterandhasalsopublishedabook
namely'AWorldtoWin',theonlyissueofwhichwas
published probably in the year 2006, though the
entirebookisconspicuouslysilentastothedateof
publication or the date of printing etc. Neither
before nor after this issue, any other issue of the
magazinehaseverseenthelightofthedayandthis
fact is candidly admitted by the appellant in his
examination.

882] Inviewofaboveevidenceavailableonrecord,Honourable
HighCourtofChhatisgarhupheldtheconvictionoftheappellantfor
theoffencepunishableunderSectionpunishableunderSections8(1),
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
733 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

8(3)&8(5)oftheTADAof2005andSections18and39(2)ofthe
UAPAof1967.

883] Thefactsofthpresentcaseisthatfromthepossessionof
accusedno.1MAHESHTirkinaxalpamphletsArts.139to141were
seized, from the possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra 16 GB
memory card containing incriminating text documents Arts.A17 to
A21 and Kodak camera alongwith charger alongwtih other articles
were seized under panchanamaExh.137. Fromthe possession of
accused no.4 Prashant Rahi eight pages relating to naxal activities
wereseizedunderpanchanamaExh.179. Fromthehousesearchof
accusedno.6SaibabaextensiveelectronicgadgetsArts.1to41CDs,
DVDs, pendrives, harddiscs containing incriminating data in the
form of text, videoclips and photographs were seized under
panchanama Exh.165. The seized electronic gadgets were sent to
CFSL,Mumbai. TheCFSl,Mumbairetrievedthedatacontainedin
above electronic gadgets and the transcripts in respect of data
contained16GBmemorycardarefiledonrecordatArts.A17toA21
alongwithCFSLreportExh.266andtranscriptsinrespectofelectronic
data Arts.1 to 41 CDs, DVDs, pendrives, harddiscs and the
transcriptsinrespectofdatacontainedinelectronicdataArts.1to41
CDs,DVDs,pendrives,harddiscsarefiledonrecordatPagenos.1to
247alongwithCFSLreportExh.267.

884] In order to see whether the ingredients of the offence

punishableunderSection18ofUAPAareestablished,itisnecessary
to scrutinize the documents seized from the possession of accused
no.1 Mahesh Tirki i.e. naxal pamphlets (Art. 139 to 141), text
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
734 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

documents Arts.A17 to A21 retrieved from 16 GB memorycard of

Sandisk company seized from the personal search of accused no.3
Hem Mishra and documents, photographs,videoclipsfoundinthe
electronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)atPagenos.1to247andArts.147to
164ofExh.267seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba
broughtonrecordbytheprosecution.
i] Art.139 is a pamphlet issued by Bhakapa
(Maowadi),(GadchiroliDivision)makingallegations
against the decision ofthe Government todestroy
the life of Aadiwasis and shows that there was
opposetotheGovernmentpoliciesimplementedin
the Gadchiroli district i.e. implementation of
SurjagadProjectandGreenHuntOperationshowing
hatredtowardstheGovernment.

ii] Art.140isapamphletissuedbyBhumkal
JoharTeDandakaryanyaSpecialZonalCommittee,
Bhakapa(Maowadi),titledas,AmarShahidirkuLal
Salam

885] Furtherfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3HemMishra
16 GB memory card of Sandisk company and Kodak camera
alongwithchargerwasfound.Thedocumentsretrievedfromthe16
GBmemorycardareasunder:

886] AdocumentatArt.A19retrievedfromthe16GBmemory
cardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3
Hem Mishra is a letter addressed to Dear friends Red Salute by
Sahyadri State Committee of Maharashtra CPI (Maoist) titled as
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
735 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Oppose the Government's ongoing war against the people of

Garhchirolidistrict. Inthesaiddocumentdetailhistoryalongwith
dateandtimeregardingkillingofaround17naxalsinencounterby
Gadchirolipoliceisgivenasunder

1] On 4.4.2013 five maoists were killed near

Batparvillage.

2] On20.1.2013policekilledsixmaoistsnamely
ShankarLakda,amemberofDivisionalCommittee,
MohanKowase,Acm, Vinod Kodape Acm, Geeta
Usendi,PlatoonDeputy Commander, Juru
MattamiandRajuGavdeatGovindgaonvillage.

3] On 12.4.2013 at village Sindesur police

encircledandindiscriminatelyfiredonajansabha
(publicmeeting)killing6people namelySukhdev,
Varlu Gave and Kalidas Duru Hidko and Comrade
KailashamemberofTippagarhareacommitteewas
killedwhenhecamedowntosavethepeople.

887] Furtheraround35incidentsofbeatingofnaxals/members
ofCPI(Maoist)atthehandsofGadchirolipolicearegiven. Inthe
saiddocumentitisfurthermentionedthataround10000policestaff
alongwith modern weapons like AK47, LMG, SLR are equipped,
however, the PLGA on the other hand having old weapons like
Bharmarandaxe.Inthesaidletterappealwasmadetofightagainst
paramilitaryforces,commandoforcestostopGreenHuntOperation
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
736 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

launchedbytheGovernment.Lastly,inthesaiddocumentitisstated
thatmassmovementand armedstrugglebothareequallyimportant
andarenecessaryfortherevolution.

888] AdocumentatPagenos.119ofExh.267isaaninterview
ofaccusedno.6SaibabaunderthetitleasMaoiststrategyinIndia
andfromthesaiddocumentitisclearthataccusedno.6Saibabais
thedeputysecretaryoftheRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF),a
frontalorganisationofRDF,anallIndianFederationofrevolutionary
organizations and in the said interview, accused no.6 Saibaba
narratedthestrategyofMaoistinIndiainwhichhestatedthatitisa
vastmovementincludesthedevelopedareas.Accusedno.6Saibaba
further stated that the Maoists are creatively implementing the
Marxist principles to the concrete conditions of India and without
armedstrugglenoresistancecanbebuiltincountrieslikeIndiaand
theresistancethathasbeenbuiltupinthepreviousyearscannotbe
retained and the armedactionsagainstthestateforcesandfeudal
forcesarecarriedouttoprotectthemovement.Fromthisdocument
itrevealsthataccusedno.6SaibababeingDeputySecretaryofRDF
statedaboutthestrategyofCPI(Maoist)aboutarmedstrugglewhich
showstheincitementtothepeopleagainsttheGovernmentofIndia.

889] The document Art.147 having path Exh23/ALLL

/Accommodationissues/Letters/lettertoSaibaba writtenbyone
SurendraMohantoaccusedno.6Saibabainwhichitismentioned
that he cannot be part of the CPI (Maoist) program, as he never
subscribedtoviolentresistance.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
737 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

a] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

LAAL/ VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2 it is seen that armed
naxalsareseencomingforgatheringforfunctionin
jungleandgreetingeachotherandmanyredbanners
areseenandononebannernameofcomradeJanki
(Anuradha Gandhi) Amar Rahe isseen and further
thegatheredarmednaxalsandotherpeoplesshouted
theslogansasBharatkiCommunistPartyMaowadi
Zindabad,Bharat ki Nav Janwadi Kranti Zindabad
andthe videoofkillingofpolicepersonsbyarmed
naxalsisseen.

b] In videoclip having path Exh.8/

(1)MATI_KELAAL/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3 itisseen
that armed naxals are seen taking training and
exercising in jungle and background sound of CPI
(Maoist) party spokesperson Aazad played and he
states about the CPI (Maoist) armed strength and
theirtacticsandfurthertheinterviewsofonenaxal
about the Kudru ambush and CPI (Maoist)
promotionalvideoisseenhowtheambushonpolice
partyisexecuted.
g] In the videoclip having path
Exh.3/films/S1/RDF/1/video_TS,VTS_01_1 itis
clear that accusedno.6Saibabaisseen takingpart
andothersaresingingsongondeathofShankarand
singing slogans Lal Salam Lal Salam. Slogan Lal
Salam is used by naxals and members of banned
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
738 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

organisationRDFandhenceitisclearthataccused
no.6 is a member of banned organisation CPI
(Maoist) and its frontal organisation RDF and
incitingthepeoplewithslogansLalSalamLalSalam.
h] In videoclip having path
Exh.3/films/s1 /RDF/1/VIDEO_ TS/VTS_01_1, it
isseenthatsomegentsandladiesraisedtheslogans
as Shahidonko Lal Salam, Navjanwadi Kranti
Zindabad,EkHiRastaEkHiRastaNaxalbariEkHi
Rasta.ThesloganNaxalbariEkHiRastaraisedin
thisvideoisresolvedasasloganofRDFinArt.157
titledasJointMeetingofAIPRFandSFPRwritten
by Rajkishore Secretary of Adhoc Executive
CommitteeRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF)on
20thMay2005.

i] In videoclip having path

Exh.3/films/s1 /RDF/2/VIDEO _TS /VTS_01_1, it
is clearthat accusedno.6Saibabaisseen speaking
abouttheKashmiripeoplesstruggleforfreedomand
gaveassurancethatRDFisnotonlysupportingthe
movement but takes active part and their main
concern is to liberate the Kashmir and further
accused no.6 Saibaba have stated that the struggle
forliberationofKashmirandourliberationarethe
same.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
739 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

890] On viewing above videoclips it is clear that the armed

naxalsofCPI(Maoist)wereparticipatinginsingingthesongswhile
dancingandsomeofthemwerearmedwithgunsalongwithbanners
ofRDF,afrontalorganizationofCPI(Maoist)intheirhandsandthey
wereattendingthemeetingsandfoundaddressingpeopletojointhe
organizationandwereincitingthepublicatlargetowagewaragainst
theGovernmentestablishedbylawthroughthepathofRDF.

891] As discussed above the facts of the Asit Kumar Sen

Gupta v State of Chhattisgarh reported in MANU/ CG/
0622/2011 andpresentcaseareidentical. Forsakeofconvenience
thesimilarityinAsit'scaseandpresentcaseisreproducedintabular
formasunder:

FactsinAsit'scase
Inthecasetheappellantwasfound
in possession of CPU containing
incriminatingelectronicdataandit
wassentforforensicexaminationto
CFL, Hyderabad and the transcript
of the materials stored in the CPU
wasavailableonrecord.
Factsinthepresentcase
In the present case the electronic
gadgetsi.e.16GBmemorycardof
Sandisk company seized from
possession of accused no.3 Hem
MishraandArts.1to41CDs,DVDs,
pendrives, harddiscs were seized
from the house search of accused
no.6 Saibaba were sent to CFSL,
Mumbai and the transcript of the
materialthereinarefiledonrecord
atExhs.266and267andatArt.147
to264.

InthiscaseCourtfoundthatthere
was enough evidence against the
appellant about exciting and
encouraging ( [kwuh dzkafr @ l'kL=
dzkarh)i.e.armedrebellion.
InthepresentcasefromArt.A19of
Exh.266andPageno.19ofExh.267
it is clear that the word armed
rebellionwasresortedtothrowout
the Government power and
machinery.

The appellant wasfound tobe the In this case there is sufficient

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
740 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

memberofbannedorganisationCPI evidence against the accused that

(Maoist) as envisaged u/s 35 of they are members of banned
UAPA. organisation CPI (Maoist) and its
frontal organisation RDF as
envisagedu/s35ofUAPA.

In the case documents relating to In this case also the letters

naxal leaders/activist exhorting
violenceandrevolution againstthe
Government established by law by
meansofarmedrebellionwrittenby
'redsalute'werefound.
(Arts.A17, Art.A19, A.A21 of
Exh.266) and documents (Page
nos.1,184ofExh.267)relatingto
leaders/activists of CPI (Maoist)
and RDF exhorting violence and
revolutionagainsttheGovernment
established by law by means of
'armed struggle' written and
receivedby'redsalute'.

892] Hence, finding of the document at Art.A19 of Exh.266

found in 16 GB memorycard in possession of accused no.3 Hem
Mishra regarding the revolutionary movement against the
Government through Armedstruggleandfindingofincriminating
documentscreatingviolenceinpublicplace andemailreceivedby
accusedno.6SaibabafromSurendraMohan(Art.147)containedin
Exh. 267 and videoclips found in the harddiscs seized from the
house search of accused no.6 Saibaba showing the rejection of
parliamentarydemocracy,findingofthreenaxalpamphlets(Arts.139
to141)foundinpossessionofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandfinding
of eight papers of naxal maoist literature alongwith typed written
papersofundertrialmaoistleaderNarayanSanyalatArt.130Ashows
thatthereisincitementtothepeopleforresortingviolenceandto
createpublicdisorder.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
741 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Naxalskillspolicepersonnels,innocentpersonsonsuspicionof
policeinformerandcauseloss,damagetopublicproperty.

893] In Asit Kumar Sen Gupta v State of Chhattisgarh

reportedin MANU/CG/0622/2011 inpara63and64andtheyare
reproducedasunder:

The sympathizers of Naxal/Maoists violence are

providingassistancewhichultimatelystrengthensand
promotesviolencewhereinpublicpropertyisdestroyed
and innocent citizens are killed. True it is that the
desireddevelopmentalactivityhasnottakenplacein
tribalareas,butatthesametimewhereveranylarge
projectiscontemplatedbytheCentralGovernmentor
theProvincialGovernment,itisattackedbythegroups
on the ground that it will finish the identity and
cultureoftribalsoritwillhavetheeffectofcausing
harmtofloraandfaunaoftheareaandatthesame
time, the Government established by law through
democratic means at both levels are being criticized
thatnodevelopmentistakingplaceintribalornaxal
affected areas. It is common knowledge that the
Naxalitesarenotallowingtheroadsandbridgestobe
builtinremoteareasprobablywithadesignthatit
will help in movement of security forces. Even if
presentisacriminalappeal,yetwhiletestingvalidity
oftheappellantsconviction,considerationhastobein
theprevailingconditionandcontextandnotmerelyin
abstractterms.
Theevidenceavailableonrecordclearlysuggest
that the appellant was a member of CPI (Maoist)
and/orCPI(ML)PeoplesWarandthatiswhyhewas
in possession of minutes of the meetings, debates,
letterswrittenbytheGeneralSecretaryetc.andwas
invitingthewitnessestojointhesaidorganizationand
wasalsoincitingthemtowagearmedrebellionagainst
the Government established by law. Such act of the
appellantisclearlypunishableunderSections8(1),
8(3)&8(5)oftheActof2005andSections18and39
(2)oftheActof1967.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
742 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

894] Inthepresentcasefromthepossessionofaccusedno.1
Mahesh Tirki, naxal pamphlet at Art.139 was seized in which the
referenceofSurjagadProjectwasmentionedinthedeepforestarea.
Thesaidprojectislocatedinforestareaandnaxalsareopposingthe
developmentinthatareabecausemovementofsecurityforceswill
startthereandthisisalsoevidentfromArticle139.Further,recently
on 23.12.2016 FIR was lodged at Etapalli Police Station at crime
no.35/2016againsttheabscondingnaxals,thecopyofwhichisfiled
onrecordalongwiththelistofdocument(Exh.472)atSr.no.3andin
that incident the naxals burnt seventysix trucks at village Hedri
which were deployed for carrying stones (iron material) for the
implementationofthesaidprojectandprotestwasmadetoprevent
theGovernmentfrommakingimplementationofthatprojectandthis
isprobablybecauseofactivitiesofnaxals.Iftheprojectwasstarted
thenthatwouldhelpinmovementofsecurityforcesinthatGreen
HuntProjectandtheexistenceofnaxalswouldbeindanger.

895] Furtherinthedocumentatpageno.175ofExh.267found
in the harddiscs seized from the house search of accused no.6
SaibabashowsthattherewasprotestforTheRaoghatRailwayLine
and the Mining Project which would derail the very existence of
BastariyaPeopleandpeopleofBastaropposingtheprojectbecause
ofdestroyofforestagainstindustrialization.Theevidenceavailable
on record shows that the accused nos.1 to 6 are the members of
banned organizationCPI (Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF
and they are supporting the ideology of naxals. This shows that
conspiracyinbetweenaccusednos.1to6isstillcontinued.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
743 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

896] Fromtheconfessionalstatementsofaccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirkiandaccusedno.2PanduNaroteatExhs.280and286itisclear
thatthearmednaxalsusedtocometotheirvillageinnaxaluniform
andthenaxalstoldthemtobringRadio,Torch,Polythenebagfrom
marketandtheyusedtopurchasethearticlesfromtheshopandused
toprovidethesametonaxal.Theyfurtherstatedthattheyhadbeen
to meet under ground lady naxal at Korgatta where they saw
Narmadakkaandother15to20naxlitesarmedwithgunsandatthe
instanceofladynaxalNarmadakkatwotothreetimestheyhadbeen
to Ballarsha railwaystation to receive the members of banned
organizationandbroughtthemtoforestareaofGadchirolidistrictto
meettheundergroundnaxals.

897] AdocumentatArt.A19retrievedfromthe16GBmemory
cardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3
Hem Mishra is a letter addressed to Dear friends Red Salute by
Sahyadri State Committee of Maharashtra CPI (Maoist) titled as
OpposetheGovernment'songoingwaragainstthepeopleof

Garhchirolidistrict. Inthesaiddocumentdetailhistoryalongwith
dateandtimeregardingkillingofaround17naxalsinencounterby
Gadchirolipoliceisgivenasunder:

1] On 4.4.2013 five maoists were killed near

Batparvillage.

2] On20.1.2013policekilledsixmaoistsnamely
ShankarLakda,amemberofDivisionalCommittee,
MohanKowase,Acm, Vinod Kodape Acm,Geeta
Usendi,PlatoonDeputyCommander, JuruMattami
andRajuGavdeatGovindgaonvillage.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
744 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

3] On 12.4.2013 at village Sindesur police

encircled and indiscrimately fired on a jan sabha
(public meeting) killing 6 people namely Sukhdev,
VarluGaveandKalidasDuru Hidko and
Comrade Kailash a member of Tippagarh area
committee waskilledwhenhecamedowntosave
thepeople.

898] Furtheraround35incidentsofbeatingofnaxals/members
ofCPI(Maoist)atthehandsofGadchirolipolicearegiven. Inthe
saiddocumentitisfurthermentionedthataround10000policestaff
alongwith modern weapons like AK47, LMG, SLR are equipped,
however, the PLGA on the other hand having old weapons like
Bharmarandaxe.Inthesaidletterappealwasmadetofightagainst
paramilitaryforces,commandoforcestostopGreenHuntOperation
launchedbytheGovernment.Lastly,inthesaiddocumentitisstated
thatmassmovementand armedstrugglebothareequallyimportant
andarenecessaryfortherevolution.

899] Fromthisletteritcanbeinferredthattheincitementwere
giventotheComradesofCPI(Maoist)toresisttheactionofpoliceby
armedstruggle. Thisshowsthatwhatevertheincidentwhichtook
placeinGadchirolidistrictaftertheamendmentof31.12.2008the
membersofCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDFandnaxals
areresponsibleforthesame.

900] Further the slogan of RDF is Naxalbari Ek Hi Rasta

which is reflected in the document which is a draft manifesto at
Art.159 retrieved from the harddisc seized from house search of
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
745 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accused no.6 Saibaba having path ex.4/31.12.12/RDFConference

material/DRAFTMANIFESTOOFRDFamendedbyconference
titled as Draft Manifesto of Revolutionary Democratic Front
(RDF)andfurtherinthisdocumentitismentionedthattheRDF
upholdsthepathof Naxalbari i.e.thepathofAndhra,Jharkhand,
BiharandDandakaranya.

901] Thedocumentatpageno.183ofExh.267retrievedfrom
theharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba
havingpathEx4/cy47513Ex4/c/onAzadisaPressstatementof
CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)CentralCommitteeNorthRegional
Bureau. ItisabouttheredsalutestoMartyrscom.Azadandcom.
Hem Pandey and suggested to take revenge for the killings of the
comrades by the khaki clad (i.e. Police) fascist gangs of AP
Government and allegations are made against the Andhra Pradesh
Governmentaboutkillingofthosecomrades.Fromthisstatementit
isclearthatoneAjaySpokespersonofCPI(Maoist)hadwrittenthis
pressstatementshowingtheviolenceagainstpolice.

902] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE LAAL/

VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2 itisseenthatarmednaxalsareseencoming
forgatheringforfunctioninjungleandgreetingeachotherandmany
red banners are seen andon one banner name ofcomrade Janki
(Anuradha Gandhi) Amar Rahe is seen and further the gathered
armed naxals and other peoples shouted the slogans asBharat ki
Communist Party MaowadiZindabad,Bharat kiNavJanwadiKranti
Zindabadandthevideoofkillingofpolicepersonsbyarmednaxals
isseen.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
746 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

903] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE LAAL/

VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3 it is seen that armed naxals are seen taking
training of firing in jungle and background sound of CPI (Maoist)
party spokesperson Aazad played and he states about the CPI
(Maoist)armedstrengthandtheirtacticsandfurthertheinterviews
ofonenaxalabouttheKudruambushandCPI(Maoist)promotional
videoisseenhowtheambushonpolicepartyisexecuted.

904] Fromtheabovediscussiontheaccusedno.1MaheshTirki
accused no.3 Hem no.6 Saibaba possessed naxal literature for the
purpose of circulating it to the underground naxals at Gadchiroli
districtandpeopleofGadchirolidistrictwithintentiontoincitethe
people to resort violence or cause public disorder and their acts
clearly falls within the ambit of Section 18 of UAPA. As already
observed in earlier part of the judgment that accused nos.1 to 6
hatchedconspiracy,theobjectwastowagewaragainstGovernment
byarmedrebellionandinviewofobservationofSupremeCourtin
case of Yash Pal Mittal v. State of Punjab, AIR 1977 Supreme
Court 2433, accused nos.2 Pandu Narote, no.4 Prashant Rahi and
Vijay Tirkiare alsoresponsible fortheunlawfulactivities. Hence
prosecution has proved that the accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki, no.2
PanduNarote,no.3HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahiandno.5Vijay
TirkiareguiltyfortheoffencepunishableunderSection18ofUAPA
r/wSection120BofIPC.

ArgumentofAdvocateShriGadlingfortheaccusedonSec.20of
UAPA
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
747 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

905] ThelearnedAdvocateShriGadlingforaccusedsubmitted
thatfortheapplicationofSection20ofUAPAitisnotsufficientthat
organisationistobedeclaredasTerroristOrganisationbutithasto
beprovedbytheprosecutionthatthesaidorganisationisinvolvedin
terroristact.Thereisnooralordocumentaryevidenceonrecordto
show that the CPI (Maoist) and its frontal organisation RDF is a
terroristorganisationandbarereadingofSection20ofUAPAreveals
thatmeremembershipofbannedorganisationisnotsufficientunless
thatorganisationisinvolvedinterroristactasdefinedunderSection
15 of UAPA. He submitted that even assuming for the sake of
argumentthataccusedareconnectedwithCPI(Maoist)organisation
stillprosecutionhasnotadducedanyoralordocumentaryevidence
showingthatCPI(Maoist)isinvolvedinanysortofterroristactivities.
Thereisabsolutelynooralordocumentaryevidenceonrecordtothat
effect.

906] He submittedthat provisionsof UAPA,TADAandPOTA

areinparamateriaandApexCourtintheabovecitedcaseobserved
thatTADAActisverymuchapplicabletodecidethecaseunderUAPA.
In support of his submission he placed reliance on the case of
KalpnathRaivs.Statereportedin(1997)8SupremeCourtCases
732whereinitisobservedthat

A.TerroristandDisruptiveActivities(Prevention)
Act,1987S.3(5)(asinsertedbyAct43of1993),S.
3(1),(2)and(3)EssentialrequirementsofS.3(5)
Expression terrorist act in S.3(5) Meaning of
Held, includes conspiracy to commit terrorist act or
abetment, incitement, etc. of such acts Acts
enumeratedinsubsection(3)cannotbedelinkedfrom
thosespecifiedinsubsection(1)Inabsenceofany
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
748 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

evidencetoshowthatterroristgangofwhichaccused
were members committed any terrorist act after
commencementofamendedAct43of1993conviction
cannotbesustained.

There are two postulates in subsection (5).

Firstisthattheaccusedshouldhavebeenamemberof
a terrorists gang of 'terrorists' organisation after
23.5.1993. Second is that the said gang or
organization should have been involved in terrorist
actssubsequentto23.5.1993. Unlessbothpostulates
existtogetherSection3(5)cannotbeusedagainstany
person.

It would be illogical to delink the acts

enumeratedinsubsection(3)fromthosespecifiedin
subsection(1)forthepurposeofunderstandingthe
meaningofterroristactindicatedinSection3(5).

907] Hesubmittedthatevenassumingforthesakeofargument
recoveryofallegedliteratureaboutRDForganizationwhichisalleged
tobefrontalorganizationofCPI(Maoist)andactivitiesofaccused
no.6 Saibaba and accused no.3 Hem Mishra is proved and even
assuming that they are the members of banned organization that
would not invite any penal consequences. In support of his
submissionhefurtherplacedrelianceonthefollowingjudgments:

[i] ArupBhuyanv.StateofAssamreported
in(2011)3SCC377whereinitisobservedthat

A]ConstitutionofIndiaArts.19(1)(c)&(a)
and21 Righttoformassociationsandfreedomof
expression Scope of Membership of
banned/terroristorganisationInferencetherefrom
Held,meremembershipofabannedorganisationwill
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
749 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

not make a person criminal unless he resorts or

incitespeopletoviolenceorcreatespublicdisorder
byviolenceorIncitementtoviolenceTerroristand
disruptiveActivities(Prevention)Act,1987S.3(5)
UnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967,S.10

[ii] IndraDasv.StateofAssamreportedin
(2011)3SCC380whereinitisobservedthat

B] ConstitutionofIndiaArts.19(1)(c)&
(a)and21Righttoformassociationsandfreedom
of expression Scope of Membership of
banned/terroristorganisationInferencetherefrom
Reiterated, mere membership of a banned
organisationwillnotmakeapersoncriminalunless
he resorts or incites people to violence or creates
publicdisorderbyviolenceorincitementtoviolence
Hence,S.3(5),TADAandS.10,UAPAread

C] Terrorist and Disruptive Activities

(Prevention) Act, 1987 S.3(5) Membership of
banned/terrorist organisation Inference Even
assuming gthat appellant was a member of ULFA,
whichisbannedorganisation,thereisnoevidenceto
showthatheindulgedinanyoftheabovementioned
actsorwasanactivememberoftheorganisation
Hence, his conviction under S.3(5) unsustainable
Activities(Prevention)Act,1967,Ss.10

[iii] State of Keralav.Raneef reportedin

(2011)1SCC784whereinitisobservedthat
A] Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act,
1967 Ss. 10, 3 and 13 Membership of alleged
illegalorganisation(notyetdeclaredunlawfulunder
S.3norotherwisefoundtobeso)Effectof

[B] Jyoti Babasaheb Chorge v State of

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
750 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Maharashtra, reported in 2013(4) Mh.L.J. (Cri.)

4481whereinitisheldbyBombayHighCourtthat

(a) CriminalProcedureCode(2of1974),S.
439andUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act(37
of 1967), S. 38 Bail Applicant was allegedly
found in possession of literature about banned
organizationMaoistNobanwasimposedonsaid
literature Nomaterialtoestablishnexusbetween
applicants and workers of banned organization
involvedinviolentactivitiesApplicantsnotinvolved
inanyviolentorunlawfulactivitiesNoprimafacie
case against applicants even in respect of offence
punishableunderAct,1967Applicantsentitledfor
bailApplicationallowed.(2011)3SCC377,395
US444(1969),201(2)Mh.L.J.(Cri.)(S.C.)12,367
US203and(2011)2SCC380,Ref.(Paras33,34,36
and38).

Conclusion

908] Thefirstgroundonwhichthedefencemadesubmission
thattheprosecutionhasnotprovedthefactthatCPI(Maoist)orits
frontalorganisationRDFisaterroristorganisationandaccusedare
membersofthesameandsuchorganisationisinvolvedinterroristact
asdefinedu/s15ofUAPA.

909] According to defence for attracting penal consequences

underSection20ofUAPAitisnotsufficientthatorganisationistobe
declared as Terrorist Organisation but it has to be proved by the
prosecutionthatthesaidorganisationisinvolvedinterroristactas
definedu/s15ofUAPA.Thereisnooralordocumentaryevidenceon
recordtoshowthattheCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDF
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
751 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

areaterroristorganisationandbarereadingofSection20ofUAPA
revealsthatmeremembershipofbannedorganisationisnotsufficient
unless it is proved that organisation is involved in terrorist act as
definedunderSection15ofUAPA.Hesubmittedthatevenassuming
for the sake of argument that accused are connected with CPI
(Maoist)organisationstillprosecutionhasnotadducedanyoralor
documentaryevidenceshowingthatCPI(Maoist)andRDFisinvolved
inanysortofterroristactivities.

910] He submittedthat amendment toSection 15and16of

UAPAwereeffectedintheyear2008,theprosecutionhastoprove
thatafteramendmentintheyear2008theaccusedarethemembers
ofbannedterroristorganisationanditisnotsufficienttoprovethat
sometimesinpastaccusedweremembersofbannedorganisationi.e.
beforetheamendmentintheyear2008.

911] So far as law relating to applicability of provisions of

Section 2(k), 15, 16 and 20 of the UAPA to the present case is
concerned,itisnecessarytohavelookontheprovisionsofSection
2(k),15,16and20ofUAPA.

Section 2(k) terrorist acthasthe meaning

assigned to it in section 15, and the expressions
terrorism and terrorist shall be construed
accordingly;

Sec.15 of UAPA defined Terrorist act. (1)

Whoever does any act with intent to threaten or
likely to threaten the unity, integrity, security or
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
752 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

sovereigntyofIndiaorwithintenttostriketerroror
likelytostriketerrorinthepeopleoranysectionof
thepeopleinIndiaorinanyforeigncountry,

(a) by using bombs, dynamite or other

explosive substances or inflammable substances or
firearms or other lethal weapons or poisonous or
noxious gases or other chemicals or by any other
substances(whetherbiologicalradioactive,nuclearor
otherwise) of a hazardous nature or by any other
meansofwhatevernaturetocauseorlikelytocause

(i)deathof,orinjuriesto,anypersonor
persons;or
(ii)lossof,ordamageto,ordestruction
of,property;

TheprovisionsofSection15and16cameinto
forcewitheffectfrom31.12.2008.Theprovisionsof
Section 3(5) of TADA 1993 is para materia with
Section20ofUAPA1967.

Sec.16Punishmentforterroristact.(1)
Whoevercommitsaterroristactshall

(a) ifsuchacthasresultedinthedeathofany
person,bepunishablewithdeathorimprisonment
forlife,andshallalsobeliabletofine;

(b) inanyothercase,bepunishablewith
imprisonmentforatermwhichshallnotbelessthan
fiveyearsbutwhichmayextendtoimprisonmentfor
life,andshallalsobeliabletofine.

Sec.20ofUAPAPunishmentforbeingmemberof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
753 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

terroristgangororganization.Anypersonwhois
a member of a terrorist gang or a terrorist
organization,whichisinvolvedinterroristact,shall
be punishable withimprisonment for aterm which
mayextendtoimprisonmentforlife,andshallalso
beliabletofine.
The said amended came into force w.e.f.
31.12.2008.ProvisionsofSection3(5)ofTADA1993
is paramateria with Section 20 of UAPA 1967.
Section3(5)ofTADA1993andSection20ofUAPA
1967arereproducedasunder:

Sec.3(5)ofTADAAnypersonwhoisamemberof
aterroristsgangoraterroristorganisation,whichis
involved in terrorist acts, shall be punishable with
imprisonmentforatermwhichshallnotbelessthan
fiveyearsbutwhichmayextendtoimprisonmentfor
lifeandshallalsobeliabletofine.

912] OngoingthroughtheaboveprovisionsofSection20of
UAPA it is clear that the ingredients of Section 3(5) of TADA and
ingredientsofSection20ofUAPAarethesame. Whileinterpreting
Section3(5)ofTADAtheApexCourtinthecaseofKalpnathRaivs.
Statereportedin(1997)8SupremeCourtCases732observedthat

A. Terrorist and Disruptive Activities

(Prevention)Act,1987S.3(5)(asinsertedbyAct
43 of 1993), S. 3(1), (2) and (3) Essential
requirementsofS.3(5)Expressionterroristactin
S.3(5)MeaningofHeld,includesconspiracyto
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
754 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

committerroristactorabetment,incitement,etc.of
such acts Acts enumerated in subsection (3)
cannot be delinked from those specified in sub
section(1)Inabsenceofanyevidencetoshowthat
terrorist gang of which accused were members
committedanyterroristactaftercommencementof
amended Act 43 of 1993 conviction cannot be
sustained.

There are two postulates in subsection (5).

Firstisthattheaccusedshouldhavebeenamember
ofaterroristsgangof'terrorists'organisationafter
23.5.1993. Second is that the said gang or
organizationshouldhavebeeninvolvedinterrorist
acts subsequent to 23.5.1993. Unless both
postulatesexisttogetherSection3(5)cannotbeused
againstanyperson.

Itwouldbeillogicaltodelinktheactsenumeratedin
subsection (3) from those specified in subsection
(1)forthepurposeofunderstandingthemeaningof
terroristactindicatedinSection3(5).

913] While discussing the role of accused No.1 to 6 in the

earlierpartofjudgmentitisfoundthataccusedNo.1to6areactive
memberofCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDFanditis
furtherdiscussedinearlierpartofthejudgmentthatRDFisafrontal
organizationofCPI(Maoist).TheCentralGovernmentbynotification
No.954,dated22.06.2009declaredCPI(Maoist)andallhisfrontal
organizationasaterroristorganization.

914] NowitisnecessarytoconsiderwhethertheCPI(Maoist)
anditsfrontalorganisationRDFisresponsibleforterroristactsi.e.
killingofinnocentpersonsonthesuspicionofpoliceinformers,police
personnel and causing loss to public property by bomb explosion
whichhadtakenplaceinGadchirolidistrictwhichtookplaceafter
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
755 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

amendmenttoSection15ofUAPAi.e.from31.12.2008.

915] ItisimportanttonotethatforapplicationofSection15of
UAPA the word, person who commits the act defined there is
commissionofactisrequiredbythepersonascontemplatedu/s15of
UAPAforwhichpunishmentisprovidedu/s16ofUAPA.

916] However,u/s20ofUAPAitisnotnecessarythataperson
should commit an offence but the person should be member of
terroristgangororganizationwhichisinvolvedinterroristact.The
requirement of Section 20of UAPAorganization should have been
involvedintheterroristactandnottheperson.Inviewofjudgment
ofApexCourtincaseofKalpnathRaivs.Statereportedin(1997)
8SupremeCourtCases732citedsupra,fortheincidentwhichtook
place after 31.12.2008 and if it is established that the terrorist
organizationisinvolvedbehindthesaidincidentsandthepersonisa
memberofsuchbannedterroristorganizationthenhewouldbeliable
forpunishmentu/s20ofUAPA.

917] Inordertoseewhethertheingredientsoftheoffence
punishableunderSection20ofUAPAareestablished,itisnecessary
to scrutinize the documents seized from the possession of accused
no.1 Mahesh Tirki i.e. naxal pamphlets (Art. 139 to 141), text
documents Arts.A17 to A21 retrieved from 16 GB memorycard of
Sandisk company seized from the personal search of accused no.3
Hem Mishra and documents,photographs,videoclipsfoundinthe
electronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)atPagenos.1to247ofExh.267and
Arts.147 to 164 seized from the house search of accused no.6
Saibaba.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
756 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

918] Fromtheconfessionalstatementsofaccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirkiandaccusedno.2PanduNaroteatExhs.280and286itisclear
thatthearmednaxalsusedtocometotheirvillageinnaxaluniform
andthenaxalstoldthemtobringRadio,Torch,Polythenebagfrom
marketandtheyusedtopurchasethearticlesfromtheshopandused
toprovidethesametonaxal.Theyfurtherstatedthattheyhadbeen
to meet under ground lady naxal at Korgatta where they saw
Narmadakkaandother15to20naxlitesarmedwithgunsandatthe
instanceofladynaxalNarmadakkatwotothreetimestheyhadbeen
to Ballarsha railwaystation to receive the members of banned
organizationandbroughtthemtoforestareaofGadchirolidistrictto
meettheundergroundnaxals.

919] AdocumentatArt.A19retrievedfromthe16GBmemory
cardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3
Hem Mishra is a letter addressed to Dear friends Red Salute by
Sahyadri State Committee of Maharashtra CPI (Maoist) titled as
Oppose the Government's ongoing war against the people of
Garhchirolidistrict. Inthesaiddocumentdetailhistoryalongwith
dateandtimeregardingkillingofaround17naxalsinencounterby
Gadchirolipoliceisgivenasunder:

1] On 4.4.2013 five maoists were killed near

Batparvillage.
2] On20.1.2013policekilledsixmaoistsnamely
ShankarLakda, a member of Divisional
Committee, Mohan Kowase, Acm, Vinod
Kodape Acm, Geeta Usendi, Platoon Deputy
Commander,JuruMattamiandRajuGavdeat
Govindgaonvillage.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
757 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

3] On 12.4.2013 at village Sindesur police

encircled and indiscrimately fired on a jan
sabha(publicmeeting)killing6people namely
Sukhdev,VarluGaveandKalidasDuru Hidko and
ComradeKailashamemberof Tippagarh area
committeewaskilledwhen he came down to save
thepeople.

920] Furtheraround35incidentsofbeatingofnaxals/members
ofCPI(Maoist)atthehandsofGadchirolipolicearegiven. Inthe
saiddocumentitisfurthermentionedthataround10000policestaff
alongwith modern weapons like AK47, LMG, SLR are equipped,
however, the PLGA on the other hand having old weapons like
Bharmarandaxe.Inthesaidletterappealwasmadetofightagainst
paramilitaryforces,commandoforcestostopGreenHuntOperation
launched by the Government. Lastly, in the said document it is
statedthatmassmovementandarmedstrugglebothareequally
importantandarenecessaryfortherevolution.

921] Fromthisletteritcanbeinferredthattheincitementwere
giventotheComradesofCPI(Maoist)toresisttheactionofpoliceby
armedstruggle. Thisshowsthatwhatevertheincidentwhichtook
placeinGadchirolidistrictaftertheamendmentof31.12.2008the
membersofCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDFandnaxals
areresponsible.

922] TheinfamoussloganofRDFis NaxalbariEkHiRasta

which is reflected in the document which is a draft manifesto at
Art.159 retrieved from the harddisc seized from house search of
accused no.6 Saibaba having path ex.4/31.12.12/RDFConference
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
758 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

material/DRAFTMANIFESTOOFRDFamendedbyconference
titled as Draft Manifesto of Revolutionary Democratic Front
(RDF)andfurtherinthisdocumentitismentionedthattheRDF
upholdsthepathof Naxalbari i.e.thepathofAndhra,Jharkhand,
BiharandDandakaranya.

923] A document at Page no.97 of Exh.267 titled as

Communist Party of India (Maoist) by Gudsa Usendi,
Spokesperson, Dandakaranya Special Zonal Committee, CPI
(Maoist) headed by Observe Martyrs Week From July 28 to
August3!RedHomagetoOurPartysForefoundersandBeloved
TeachersComradesCharuMazumdarandKanhaiChatterjee!and
further it is mentioned in the document that By virtue of these
sacrifices, revolutionary movement has been advancing raising the
sloganNaxalbariEkHiRasta.Fromthisdocumentitisclearthat
theDandakaranyaSpecialZonalCommitteeofCPI(Maoist)abanned
organisationmadeincitementtowageaagainsttheGovernmentand
choose a way of naxal with slogan Naxalbari Ek Hi Rasta and
opposetheschemeofGovernmenti.e.OperationGreenHunt.

924] AdocumentatPageno.99ofExh.267titledasConceptof
Revolutionary Mass Organizations (RMOs) reveals that no
revolutioncanadvanceuntilandunlessthevastmassesaremobilized
toactivelyparticipateonamassscaleinitandnotmerelystayas
passiveobservers.Todosorequiresthattheparty,thepeople'sarmy
andtheUFbeeffectivelyconsolidatedwhiledoingthemasswork.
Buildingthesecretpartydeepamongstthemassesanddrawingthem
intothearmedstruggleandantiimperialist,antifeudalUnitedFront
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
759 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

canaloneresultineffectivewieldingtheseizureofpoliticalpower.It
further suggests that while people's war has already started in 17
statesofIndiarevolutionarymassorganizationsmustemphasizetheir
activitiesonstrengtheningthearmedstrugglesandbuildingarmies
while continue their mass movements like processions,
Demonstrations, mass meetings, Protest movements, street corner
meetings,seminarwithintellectuals,culturalfunctionsetc.Fromthis
documentitisclearthatCPI(Maoist)isconductingarmedstruggle
andattemptingtocommitoffencesunderterroristact.

925] Ininterview at pageno.119ofExh.267 takenoutfrom

the harddisc Exh.4 having path Exh.4/OLD EHD/OLD/All 12345
titled as Maoist Strategy in India with Sub title An interview
with G.N.Saibaba, accused no.6 Saibaba stated that he is the
deputy secretary of the Revolutionary Democratic Front, an all
Indian Federation of revolutionary organizationsandfurtherstated
thattheMaoistarefollowingthenewdemocraticmethodprovedby
ChinaundertheleadershipofMaothattherevolutionarymovements
mustputpriorityonworkingintheareaswherethestateisweak.
The Maoists work in the backward regions to smash the local
governmentandestablishpeople'spower. Theybuildbasesinthese
backwardareas. Thisdoesn'tmeanthattheydon'talsoworkinthe
cities.

926] ItisfurthermentionedintheinterviewinNote2thatthe
followingisacloserdescriptionofthecommunistmovementinIndia
todayaccordingtoaccusedno.6Saibabaandtherearethreedifferent
mainstreams oftherevolutionarymovementlike(a)CPNmaoist
peopleswar(b)Cpi(ml)naxalbari,ctandothersarealsoMaoistand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
760 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

close to the Maoists. Also CPRCML, Red Flag, Communist

Revolutionary Platform, CCICP(ml), CPI(ml)central team, CPM
(ml)newdemocracy.

927] Further, from the letter Article 147 having path

Exh23/ALLL/ Accommodation issues/Letters/ letter to Saibaba
retrievedfromtheharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccused
no.6Saibabawhichisaletteraddressedtoaccusedno.6Saibababy
SurendraMohaninwhichitismentionedthatsaidSurendraMohan
cannotbepartoftheCPI(Maoist)program,asheneversubscribedto
violent resistance and he was taking initiative for peace which
between the Government and the Maoists and he was proposing
violenceonbothsidesshouldcometoanend. Thecontentsofthis
letterclearlyshowsthatCPI(Maoist)waspromotingtheactivitiesof
violenceandhencesaidSurendraMohanwasnotreadytoworkwith
CPI(Maoist).

928] Inordertoprovetheincitementonthepartofaccused,
prosecutionreliedonfollowingvideoclipsfoundinelectronicgadgets
(Arts.1to41)seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba:

(1) In the videoclip having path Exh.16/(1)

NAXILISTES/ VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1 it is seen that
armednaxalsinuniformsareseenwalkinginjungle
and they are campaigning and attending public
meetingshowingnaxaltacticsinjungle.

(2) In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
761 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_20
10/Kutul_Maad/kutulbhoo mkal_2010 armed
naxalsinuniformsalongwiththevillagersareseen
gatheredinjungletocelebratethe10thanniversary
ofBhoomkalandtheyareshoutingwiththeslogans
as Lal Salam, Mahan Bhoomkal Zindabad, Mahan
Bhoomkal Shahidonko Lal Salam and further one
armed naxal seen addressing to the gathering of
around2000to3000peoplesandarmednaxals.

(3) In the videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_20
10/Vayanar_ EBT/1/DSCN 4236, armed naxals in
uniformsalongwiththevillagersareseengathered
injungleareshoutingwiththeslogansasJantana
sarkar ko majbut karo, Dandkaranyako aadhar
elakeme badal dalo,Bharat ki communist party
maowadizindabad.

(4) In the videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_20
10/Vayanar_EBT/2/Bhoomakal _ 2010, it is seen
that CPI (Maoist) armed naxals along with the
villagers are seen marching in jungle with red
colouredbannersandflagsandsomegreencoloured
dressedgirlsseendancingandsingingonthestage.
Furtheritisseenaround2to3thousandvillagers
gatheringalongwitharmedCPI(Maoist)naxalsand
onenaxalspeaksandmanyredcolouredbannersand
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
762 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

pictures, naxal martyr monument is seen around

thereandfurtheritisseenthatCPI(Maoist)armed
naxalsinuniformsaredancingandonenaxalseen
takingvideoshootingofthedance.

(5) In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

LAAL/ VIDEO _TS/VTS_01_2 armed naxals in
uniformsareseencomingforgatheringforfunction
in jungle and greeting each other also many red
bannersareseenandonone banneritisseen the
namecomradeJanki(AnuradhaGandhi)AmarRahe
and further the gathered armed naxals and other
peoplesshoutedtheslogansasBharatkiCommunist
Party Maowadi Zindabad, Bharat ki Nav Janwadi
KrantiZindabadand encounterbyarmednaxalsin
whichpolicepersonswerekilledisseen.Clipsofthe
saidvideoshowsthatthemembersofCPI(Maoist)
anditsfrontalorganisationRDFarepropagatingthe
terrorist act and unlawful activities amongst the
people in which police personnels were killed by
them and accused no.6 Saibaba has promoted the
saidunlawfulactivitiestoinciteorabetthepeople.

(6) In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_20
10/Vayanar_EBT/1/DSCN 4236, armed naxals in
uniformsalongwiththevillagersareseengathered
in jungle are shouting with the slogans as Jantana
sarkar ko majbut karo, Dandkaranyako aadhar
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
763 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

elakeme badal dalo, Bharat ki communist party

maowadizindabad.Contentsofthevideoclipshows
aboutstrengtheningtherevolutionarystruggle.

929] Further the slogan of RDF is Naxalbari Ek Hi Rasta

which is reflected in the document which is a draft manifesto at
Art.159 retrieved from the harddisc seized from house search of
accused no.6 Saibaba having path ex.4/31.12.12/RDFConference

material/DRAFTMANIFESTOOFRDFamendedbyconference
titled as Draft Manifesto of Revolutionary Democratic Front
(RDF)andfurtherinthisdocumentitismentionedthattheRDF
upholdsthepathof Naxalbari i.e.thepathofAndhra,Jharkhand,
BiharandDandakaranya.

930] Thedocumentatpageno.183ofExh.267retrievedfrom
theharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba
havingpathEx4/cy47513Ex4/c/onAzadisaPressstatementof
CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)CentralCommitteeNorthRegional
Bureau. ItisabouttheredsalutestoMartyrscom.Azadandcom.
Hem Pandey and suggested to take revenge for the killings of the
comrades by the khaki clad (i.e. Police) fascist gangs of AP
Government and allegations are made against the Andhra Pradesh
Governmentaboutkillingofthosecomrades.Fromthisstatementit
isclearthatoneAjaySpokespersonofCPI(Maoist)hadwrittenthis
press statement showing the violence against police. The related
detailsofvideoclipshavebeenenumeratedasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
764 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

a] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

LAAL/ VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2 it is seen that armed
naxalsareseencomingforgatheringforfunctionin
jungleandgreetingeachotherandmanyredbanners
areseenandononebannernameofcomradeJanki
(AnuradhaGandhi)AmarRaheisseenandfurther
the gathered armed naxals and other peoples
shoutedtheslogansasBharatkiCommunistParty
Maowadi Zindabad,Bharat ki Nav Janwadi Kranti
Zindabadandthe videoofkillingofpolicepersons
byarmednaxalsisseen.

b] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

LAAL/ VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3 it is seen that armed
naxalsareseentakingtrainingoffiringinjungleand
background sound of CPI (Maoist) party
spokespersonAazadplayedandhestatesaboutthe
CPI (Maoist) armed strength and their tactics and
furthertheinterviewsofonenaxalabouttheKudru
ambushandCPI(Maoist)promotionalvideoisseen
howtheambushonpolicepartyisexecuted.

931] Inthepresentcasefromthepossessionofaccusedno.1
MaheshTirki,naxalpamphletsat Art.139wasseizedinwhichthe
referenceofSurjagadProjectismentionedinthedeepforestarea.
Thesaidprojectislocatedinforestareaandnaxalsareopposingthe
developmentinthatareabecausemovementofsecurityforceswill
startthereandthisisalsoevidentfromArticle139.Further,recently
on 23.12.2016 FIR was lodged at Etapalli Police Station at crime
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
765 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

no.35/2016againsttheabscondingnaxals,thecopyofwhichisfiled
onrecordalongwithlistofdocumentatExh.472atSr.no.3 andin
that incident the naxals burnt seventysix trucks at village Hedri
which were deployed for carrying stones (iron material) for the
implementationofthesaidprojectandprotestwasmadetoprevent
theGovernmentfrommakingimplementationofthatprojectandthis
isprobablybecauseofactivitiesofnaxals.Iftheprojectwasstarted
thenthatwouldhavebeenhelpedinmovementofsecurityforcesin
that Green Hunt Project and the existence of naxals would be in
danger.

932] Furtherinthedocumentatpageno.175ofExh.267found
in the harddiscs seized from the house search of accused no.6
Saibaba shows the protest of The Raoghat Railway Line and the
Mining Project which would derail the very existence of Bastariya
PeopleandpeopleofBastaropposingtheprojectbecauseofdestroy
offorestagainstindustrialization. Theevidenceavailableonrecord
shows that the accused nos.1 to 6 are the members of banned
organizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDFandthey
aresupportingtheideologyofnaxals.Thisshowsthatconspiracyin
betweenaccusednos.1to6isstillcontinued.

933] FromtheabovediscussionitisclearthatRDFisformed
withpopularsloganNaxalbariEkHiRasta. InGadchirolidistrict
almost all cases where killing or attempt of murder of police
personnelandinnocentpersonsonthesuspicionofpoliceinformer
and causing destruction, loss or damage to public property. The
chargesheetshavebeenfiledagainstnaxals. Thisisclearfromthe
copyofFIRregisteredatEtapalliPoliceStationatCrimeNo.35/2016
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
766 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

againstabscondingnaxalsoffencewasregisteredallegingburningof
76trucksatHedri.Fromthevideoclipsasdiscussedaboveitisseen
that naxals were killing police personnel and planting ambush for
killingofpolicepersonnel.Furtherthereisatextdocumentinwhich
itisappeal totakerevengeforthekillingsofthecomradesbythe
khakiclad(i.e.Police)fascistgangs. Thisshowsfortheincidentof
killing and attempting murder of police personnel and innocent
personson thesuspicion ofpoliceinformerwhichtookplaceafter
31.12.2008themembersofCPIMaoistanditsfrontalorganization
RDFareresponsible.

934] Further from the email at Article 147 having path

Exh23/ALLL/ Accommodation issues/Letters/ letter to Saibaba,
sentbySurendraMohantoaccusedno.6Saibabait isclearthathe
withdrewfromthemembershipofCPI(Maoist)becauseitinvolvedin
violent activities and accused no.6 Saibaba also replied the same.
ThisshowsthatmembersofCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisation
RDFareinvolvedinviolentactivities.

935] FromthepamphletsArts.139to141foundinpossession
of accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki which was issued by Bhakapa
(Maowadi), (Gadchiroli Division) and Bhumkal Johar Te
DandakaryanyaSpecialZonalCommittee,Bhakapa(Maowadi),titled
as, Amar Shahidirku Lal Salam and Bhartachi Communist Party
(Maowadi), Maharashtra Rajya Samiti and Navjanwadi Kranti i.e.
RDFinwhichprotestwasmadeforSurjagadprojectandinrecently
i.e. on 23.12.2016 naxals burnt 76 trucks on the site of Surjagad
Project and to that effect FIR filed alongwith list of document at
Exh.472atSr.no.3.Fromthisitisclearlyinferredthatwhateverthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
767 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

activities of killing of innocent persons on the suspicion of police

informer, killing and attempt of killing of police personnel and
destructionanddamagetopublicpropertyfrom31.12.2008tilldate
ofFIR,membersofRDFandCPIMaoistandmembersofRDFare
responsibleandfurtherfromtheFIRitcanbeinferredthatconspiracy
betweenaccusednos.1to6iscontinued.

936] The prosecution case against the accused is that on or

priorto12.9.2009theytheyhatchedcriminalconspiracytowagewar
against the Government of India and to collect people with the
intentionofwagingwaragainsttheGovernmentofIndia,tooverawe
bymeansofcriminalforcetheGovernmentofMaharashtraandthe
GovernmentofIndia,toshakeandreducethefaithofthecommon
citizen in its democratic Government by large scale violence
destructionoflivesandpropertyandtherebydestabilizethesystemof
Governmentestablishedbylaw,toorganizethespreadofsecessionist
andrebelliousthoughtsbyholdingconvertandsecretmeetings,to
collectmoneyinIndiaforachievingtheobjectsofthesaidcriminal
conspiracy by illegal means, to continue unlawful activities of
Communist Party of India (Maoist) and its front organization
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront,forachievingtheobjectsofcriminal
conspiracy, to continue the activities of Terrorist Gang, banned
terroristorganizationorunlawfulassociation,singlyorjointlyasa
memberoftheTerroristGang&bannedorganizationCPIMaoist&its
frontal organisation Revolutionary Democratic Front to conspire,
advocate, incite, abet & knowingly facilitate the commission of a
terrorist act and unlawful activities by use of violence or other
unlawfulmeans,totakepartorcommitoradvocate,abetorincitethe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
768 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

commission of unlawful activities, being the member of a banned

TerroristGang.

937] Thisshowsthatthenaxalactivitieswhichtookplacein
GadchirolidistrictandinalloverIndiaafter31.12.2008i.e.killing
andattemptofmurderofinnocentpersonsonthesuspicionofpolice
informers, police personnel and damage, loss and destruction of
publicproperty themembersofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)
anditsfrontalorganizationRDFareresponsible.Hence,prosecution
has proved the offence punishable under Section 20ofUAPAread
withSection120BofIPC.

Meremembershipofbannedorganizationnotsufficient

938] LearnedadvocateShriGadlingforaccusedhasreliedon
judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in the matters of Arup
BhuyanVs.StateofAssam,reportedin2011(1)SCC,784(SC),and
SriIndraDasVs.StateofAssam,reportedin(2011)3SCC380to
arguethatmerelybeingamemberofabannedorganizationwillnot
incriminate the person and, therefore, even if it is found that the
appellant was a member of a banned CPI (Marxist) and/or CPI
(Marxist Leninist) Peoples War, he cannot be held guilty of
committinganoffenceunderSection124AofIPCorforcommitting
offencesundertheActof2005andtheActof1967.

939] InthematterofArupBhuyan(Supra),allegationagainst
himwasthathewasamemberofULFAandtheonlymaterialagainst
him was his alleged confessional statement made before the
SuperintendentofPoliceinwhichheissaidtohaveidentifiedthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
769 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

house ofthe deceased. Afterreferringtoitsearlierdecision inthe

matterofStateofKeralaVs.Raneef{2011(1)SCALE8}wherein
theHonbleSupremeCourtagreeingwiththeUSSupremeCourts
decisioninElfbrandtVs.Russell,384U.S.17(1966),whichhas
rejectedthedoctrineofguiltbyassociation,theHonbleSupreme
Courtheldthus:
Meremembershipofabannedorganizationwillnot
incriminateapersonunlessheresortstoviolenceor
incitespeopletoviolenceordoesanactintendedto
create disorder or disturbance of public peace by
resorttoviolence.(Emphasissupplied)

940] Atthisjuncture,itisnecessarytoconsiderobservations
madeincaseofArupBhuyan.v.StateofAssamreportedin(2015)
12SCCwhereinTheirLordshipofApexCourtobservedthat
SupremeCourtinArupBhuyan,reportedin(2011)3
SCC 377 reading down S. 3(5), Terrorist and
DisruptiveActivities(Prevention)Act,1987soasnotto
violate Arts. 19 and 21 of the Constitution, holding
thatmeremembershipofbannedorganizationwould
notmakeapersoncriminallyliableunlessheresortsto
violenceorincitespeopletoviolenceorcreatespublic
disorderbyviolenceorincitementtoviolenceRegard
beinghadtoimportantissueraised,matterdirectedto
beplacedbeforelargerBenchTerroristandDisruptive
Activities 9 (Prevention) Act, 1987 S. 3(5)
UnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967S.10.

941] Further in the Book of Principles of Statutory

Interpretation by Justice G P Singh 14th Edition revised by
JusticeAKPatnaikatPageno.975,itisobservedthat
InIndradasv.StateofAssam,itwasheldthatmere
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
770 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

membershipofabannedorganisationasprovidedin
section3(5)oftheTerroristandDisruptiveActivities
(Prevention) Act, 1987 and section 10 of the
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 are if
literallyreadunconstitutionalastheywillthenviolate
Article 19(1) and (2) of the Constitution and they
havetobereaddowntomeanthatunlesstheperson
resortsorincitesviolenceorcreatespublicdisorder
byviolenceorincitementtoviolencehewouldnotbe
held guilty of the offence simply by becoming a
member.

(2011)3SCC380paras23to44:(2011)2JT153.
The editor has rightly commented that would the
court be so sanguine when the organisation
concerned is an international terrorist organisation
whoseavowedaimistheverydestructionofIndian
CivilSocietyandtheliberalIndianState?

Itisimportanttonotethatprovisionsof
Section20ofUAPAareparimateriawithprovisionof
Section3(5)ofTADA.

942] The Constitutional Bench of Apex Court in Hitendra

VishnuThakurandothersvs.StateofMaharashtrareportedin
1994(4)SCC602upheldtheconstitutionalvalidityoftheprovisions
of Section 3(5) of TADA which is in pari materia with Sec. 20 of
UAPA. FurtherwhileupholdingtheotherprovisionsofTADAwhich
areparimateriawithprovisionsofSs.38and39ofUAPA.TheApex
Court in Mohammad Ekbal Sheikh v. State of Maharashtra and
Kartarsing,theApexCourtheldasunder

943] In Mohd.Iqbal M. Shaikh's case (supra), ApexCourt

held:

"Inviewoftherivalsubmissionsatthebar,thefirst
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
771 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

questionthatarisesforourconsiderationiswhether
theactivitiescanbeheldtobeterroristactivities'so
as to bring it within the purview of TADA. The
expression`terroristact'hasnotbeendefinedand,
on the other hand, Section 2(h) stipulates that it
wouldhavethesamemeaningashasbeenassigned
toitinsubsection(1)ofSection3.Theexpression
`terrorism'hasnotbeendefinedundertheActand
as has been held by this Court, in the case of
HITENDRA VISHNU THAKUR AND ORS. v. STATE
OF MAHARASHTRA. 1994(4) SCC 602, it is not
possibletogiveaprecisedefinitionofterrorismor
to lay down what constituted terrorism. But the
Courthadindicatedintheaforesaiddecisionthatit
may be possible to describe it as use of violence
when its most important result is not merely the
physicalandmentaldamageofthevictimbutthe
prolongedpsychologicaleffectitproducesorhasthe
potentialofproducingonthesocietyasawhole.It
hasalsobeenstatedintheaforesaiddecisionthatif
theobjectoftheactivityistodisturbharmonyofthe
societyortoterrorisepeopleandthesocietywitha
viewtodisturbeventhetempo,tranquillityofthe
society,andasenseoffearandinsecurityiscreated
inthemindsofasectionofthesocietyorsocietyat
large, then it will, undoubtedly, be held to be a
terroristact.Thequestion,therefore,doesnotreally
boildowntoanexaminationastowhetherforthe
activities, under the normal criminal law, the
accusedpersonscanbepunishedbuttoexaminethe
real impact of such gruesome and atrocious
activitiesonthesocietyatlargeoratleastonthe
section of the society. If the case in hand is
examined from the aforesaid stand point, on the
facts that shortly after the demolition of Babri
Masjid at Ayodhya, a communal riot erupted in
Mumbai and during that period in the locality in
question which was predominantly occupied by
Muslims,aChawloccupiedbyHinduswhowerein
minoritywassettofirebythepeoplebelongingto
the rival community and on account of such fire,
several people were burnt alive, it is difficult to
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
772 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

acceptthecontentionofMr.Jainthattheactivities
do not fall within the ambit to TADA. In our
consideredopinion,judgingfromtheatrocityofthe
activitiesandjudgingfromthesensitiveandtense
atmosphereprevailinginthetownunderwhichthe
acts were perpetrated resulting ultimately in the
death of several persons, the conclusion becomes
irresistible that such activities has far reaching
consequencesanditaffectsthesocietyatlargeand
theeventempohadbeengreatlydisturbedandas
suchtheprovisionsoftheActgetattractedtosuch
activities."

55. "That the prominent methodofunderstanding

thelegislativeintention,inamatterofthisnature,is
toseewhetherthesubstantiveprovisionsoftheAct
require mensrea element as a constituent
ingredientforanoffence.OffenceunderSectin3(1)
ofPOTAwillbeconstitutedonlyifitisdonewith
"intent". IfParliamentstipulatesthatthe"terrorist"
itselfhastobecommittedwithacriminalintention,
canitbesaidthatapersonwho"profess"(asunder
Section20)"invitessupport"or"arranges,manages
orassistsin arrangingormanagingameeting"or
"addresses a meeting" (as under Section 21) has
committed the offence if he does not have an
intentionORdesigntofurthertheactivitiesofany
terroristorganizationorthecommissionofterrorist
acts? We are clear that it is not. Therefore, it is
obviousthattheoffenceunderSection20or21or
22needspositiveinferencethatapersonhasacted
with intent of furthering or encouraging terrorist
activity or facilitating its commission. In other
words, these sections are limited only to those
activities that have the intent of encouraging or
furthering or promoting or facilitating the
commission of terrorist activities. If these sections
are understood in this way, there cannot be any
misuse. With this clarification we uphold the
constitutionalvalidityofSections20,21and22"
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
773 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

944] Now it is necessary to consider whether the ratio laid

downinArupBhuyanandIndraDaswouldbeapplicabletothefacts
ofthecaseinhandwithoutgoingtothefactualaspectofthecaseof
Arun Bhuyan and Indra Das. At this juncture, it is necessary to
consider the ratio laiddownbytheApexCourt in Padmasundara
Rao(Dead)andothersvStateofT.N.andothers reportedin
AIR2002SupremeCourt1334whereinitisheldthat

(A) Interpretation of Statutes Precedents

RelianceondecisionsCannotbeplacedwithout
discussing fact situation of decision relied on.
Courts should not place reliance on decisions
withoutdiscussingastohowthefactualsituationfits
inwiththefactsituationofthedecisiononwhich
relianceisplaced. Thereisalwaysperilintreating
thewordsofaspeechorjudgmentasthoughthey
arewordsinalegislativeenactmentanditistobe
rememberedthatjudicialutterancesaremadeinthe
setting of the facts of a particular case.
Circumstantialflexibility,oneadditionalordifferent
fact may make a world of difference between
conclusionsintwocases.

945] Atthisstage,furtheritisnecessarytoconsiderratiolaid
down bythe Apex Court incase of Ramesh Singh alias Photti v.
StateofA.P.reportedinAIR2004SupremeCourt4545whereinit
isobservedthat
(B) Precedent Earlier case Can be treated as
precedent only if facts and circumstances in such
earlier cited case is in pari materia in all respects
withfactsandcircumstancesofcaseinhand.(Para
11)
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
774 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

946] In both Arup Bhuyan and Indra Das cases, the only
materialagainsttheaccusedwasconfessionalstatement.Exceptthis,
therewasnootherevidencetoconnecttheaccusedwiththecrime
and in view of these peculiar facts, the Apex Court made a
observations in both the cases that mere membership of banned
organization would not make a person criminally liable unless he
resorts to violence or incites people to violence or creates public
disorderbyviolenceorincitementtoviolence.However,presentcase
isnotonlybasedonconfessionalstatementsofaccusedno.1Mahesh
Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote made before P.W.12 Nileshwar Vyas,
JudicialMagistrateF.C.Aheributitiscorroboratedbytheevidenceof
P.W.9RajuAtramandfurtherthereareseveraltextdocuments,video
clips,photographsfoundinelectronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)seized
during house search of accused no.6 Saibaba and text documents
Arts.A17 to A21 found in 16 GB memorycard seized from the
personalsearchofaccusedno.3HemMishra.Followingarethefew
text documents and video clips which show that member of CPI
(Maoist)andRDFresortedtoviolentactivities.

947] AdocumentatArt.A19retrievedfromthe16GBmemory
cardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3
Hem Mishra is a letter addressed to Dear friends Red Salute by
Sahyadri State Committee of Maharashtra CPI (Maoist) titled as
Oppose the Government's ongoing war against the people of
Garhchirolidistrict. Inthesaiddocumentdetailhistoryalongwith
dateandtimeregardingkillingofaround17naxalsinencounterby
Gadchirolipoliceisgivenasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
775 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1] On4.4.2013fivemaoistswerekillednear
Batparvillage.
2] On20.1.2013policekilledsixmaoistsnamely
ShankarLakda,amemberofDivisional
Committee,MohanKowase,Acm, Vinod
KodapeAcm,GeetaUsendi,PlatoonDeputy
Commander,JuruMattamiandRajuGavdeat
Govindgaonvillage.
3] On12.4.2013atvillageSindesurpolice
encircledandindiscrimatelyfiredonajan
sabha(publicmeeting)killing6people
namelySukhdev,VarluGaveandKalidasDuru
HidkoandComradeKailashamemberof
Tippagarharea committeewaskilledwhen
hecamedowntosavethepeople.

948] Furtheraround35incidentsofbeatingofnaxals/members
ofCPI(Maoist)atthehandsofGadchirolipolicearegiven. Inthe
saiddocumentitisfurthermentionedthataround10000policestaff
alongwith modern weapons like AK47, LMG, SLR are equipped,
however, the PLGA on the other hand having old weapons like
Bharmarandaxe.Inthesaidletterappealwasmadetofightagainst
paramilitaryforces,commandoforcestostopGreenHuntOperation
launchedbytheGovernment.Lastly,inthesaiddocumentitisstated
thatmassmovementand armedstrugglebothareequallyimportant
andarenecessaryfortherevolution.

949] AdocumentatPagenos.119ofExh.267isaaninterview
ofaccusedno.6SaibabaunderthetitleasMaoiststrategyinIndia
andfromthesaiddocumentitisclearthataccusedno.6Saibabais
thedeputysecretaryoftheRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF),a
frontalorganisationofRDF,anallIndianFederationofrevolutionary
organizations and in the said interview, accused no.6 Saibaba
narratedthestrategyofMaoistinIndiainwhichhestatedthatitisa
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
776 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

vastmovementincludesthedevelopedareas.Accusedno.6Saibaba
further stated that the Maoists are creatively implementing the
Marxist principles to the concrete conditions of India and without
armedstrugglenoresistancecanbebuiltincountrieslikeIndiaand
theresistancethathasbeenbuiltupinthepreviousyearscannotbe
retained and the armedactionsagainstthestateforcesandfeudal
forcesarecarriedouttoprotectthemovement.Fromthisdocument
itrevealsthataccusedno.6SaibababeingDeputySecretaryofRDF
statedaboutthestrategyofCPI(Maoist)aboutarmedstrugglewhich
showstheincitementtothepeopleagainsttheGovernmentofIndia.

950] The document Art.147 having path Exh23 /ALLL

/Accommodation issues/Letters/ letter to Saibaba written by one

SurendraMohantoaccusedno.6Saibabainwhichitismentioned
that he cannot be part of the CPI (Maoist) program, as he never
subscribed to violent resistance. This shows that CPI (Maoist) is
involvedinviolentactivities.

951] Thedocumentatpageno.183ofExh.267retrievedfrom
theharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba
havingpathEx4/cy47513Ex4/c/onAzadisaPressstatementof
CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)CentralCommitteeNorthRegional
Bureau. ItisabouttheredsalutestoMartyrscom.Azadandcom.
Hem Pandey and suggested to take revenge for the killings of the
comrades by the khaki clad (i.e. Police) fascist gangs of AP
Government and allegations are made against the Andhra Pradesh
Governmentaboutkillingofthosecomrades.Fromthisstatementit
isclearthatoneAjaySpokespersonofCPI(Maoist)hadwrittenthis
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
777 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

pressstatementshowingtheviolenceagainstpolice.

952] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE LAAL/

VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2 itisseenthatarmednaxalsareseencoming
forgatheringforfunctioninjungleandgreetingeachotherandmany
red banners are seen andon one banner name ofcomrade Janki
(Anuradha Gandhi) Amar Rahe is seen and further the gathered
armed naxals and other peoples shouted the slogans asBharat ki
Communist Party MaowadiZindabad,Bharat kiNavJanwadiKranti
Zindabadandthevideoofkillingofpolicepersonsbyarmednaxals
isseen.

953] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE LAAL/

VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3 it isseen that armed naxals are seen taking
training and exercising in jungle and background sound of CPI
(Maoist)party spokesperson Aazadplayedandhe statesaboutthe
CPI (Maoist) armed strength and their tactics and further the
interviewsofonenaxalabouttheKudruambushandCPI(Maoist)
promotional video is seen how the ambush on police party is
executed.

954] In the videoclip having path Exh.3/films/

S1/RDF/1/video_TS,VTS_01_1itisclearthataccusedno.6Saibaba
isseentakingpartandothersaresingingsongondeathofShankar
andsingingslogansLalSalamLalSalam.SloganLalSalamisused
bynaxalsandmembersofbannedorganisationRDFandhenceitis
clear that accused no.6 is a member of banned organisation CPI
(Maoist) and its frontal organisation RDF and inciting the people
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
778 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

withslogansLalSalamLalSalam.

955] In videoclip having path Exh.3/ films/ s1/RDF/

1/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1,itisseenthatsomegentsandladiesraised
theslogansasShahidonkoLalSalam,NavjanwadiKrantiZindabad,
Ek Hi Rasta Ek Hi Rasta Naxalbari Ek Hi Rasta. The slogan
NaxalbariEkHiRastaraisedinthisvideoisresolvedasasloganof
RDFinArt.157titledasJointMeetingofAIPRFandSFPRwrittenby
Rajkishore Secretary of Adhoc Executive Committee Revolutionary
DemocraticFront(RDF)on20thMay2005.

956] In videoclip having path Exh.3/films /s1/RDF/2/

VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1,itisclearthataccusedno.6Saibabaisseen
speakingabouttheKashmiripeoplesstruggleforfreedomandgave
assurancethatRDFisnotonlysupportingthemovementbuttakes
active part and their main concern is to liberate the Kashmir and
further accused no.6 Saibaba have stated that the struggle for
liberationofKashmirandourliberationarethesame.

957] On viewing above videoclips it is clear that the armed

naxalsofCPI(Maoist)wereparticipatinginsingingthesongswhile
dancingandsomeofthemwerearmedwithgunsalongwithbanners
ofRDF,afrontalorganizationofCPI(Maoist)intheirhandsandthey
wereattendingthemeetingsandfoundaddressingpeopletojointhe
organizationandwereincitingthepublicatlargetowagewaragainst
theGovernmentestablishedbylawthroughthepathofRDF.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
779 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

958] In view of above discussion finding of text documents

whereinitismentionedthattoprotestGovernmentactionbyarmed
rebellionandcommunicationsfoundintheformoftextdocumentsin
theformofelectronicdatabetweenthemembersofCPI(Maoist)and
RDFforfurtheringtheterroristactivitiesofthesaidorganizationand
causingthepeopleandmembersofbannedorganizationtoresortfor
violence and causing public disorder and the incident of killing of
innocent persons on the suspicion of police informers, police
personnelanddestructionanddamagetopublicpropertywhichtook
placeafter31.12.2008tilltoday,themembersofCPI(Maoist)and
RDFareresponsibleandtheconspiracybetweenaccusednos.1to6
hasbeenestablishedbytheprosecution.Theprosecutionhasproved
thecaseagainstaccusedu/s20ofUAPAr/w120BofIPCandthe
ratiolaiddowninthecasesofIndraDasv.StateofAssamreported
in(2011)3SCC380,StateofKeralav.Raneefreportedin(2011)
1SCC784andArupBhuyanv.StateofAssamreportedin(2011)
3SCC377 citedsupraarenotapplicabletothefactsofthepresent
case.

Section38and39ofUAPA

959] Now it is necessary tosee whetherthe prosecution has

provedthecaseagainstaccusedfortheoffencepunishableu/s38and
39ofUAPA.Inordertoconstitutetheoffencepunishableu/s38and
39ofUAPAprosecutionhastoprovetheingredientsofthoseSections.
TheingredientsofSections38and39ofUAPAarecommonhencethe
saidSectionsarediscussedtogether.
Sec.38 Offence relating to membership of a
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
780 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

terroristorganisation
(1) A person, who associates himself, or
professestobe associated, with a terrorist
organisation with intention to further its activities,
commitsanoffencerelatingto membership of a
terroristorganisation:
Providedthatthissubsectionshallnotapply
wherethepersonchargedisabletoprove
(a)thattheorganisationwasnotdeclaredasa
terrorist organisation at the time when he
becameamemberorbegantoprofesstobea
member;and
(b)thathehasnottakenpartintheactivities
of the organisation at any time during its
inclusion in the Schedule as a terrorist
organisation.
(2)Aperson,whocommitstheoffencerelating
tomembershipofaterroristorganisationunder
subsection (1), shall be punishable with
imprisonmentforatermnotexceedingten years,
orwithfine,orwithboth.

Sec.39
. Offence relating to support given to a
terrorist organization. (1) A person commits the
offence relating to support given to a terrorist
organisation,
(a)who,withintentiontofurthertheactivity
ofaterroristorganization,
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
781 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

(i)invitessupportfortheterroristorganization,
and
(ii)thesupportisnotorisnotrestrictedto
provide moneyorotherpropertywithinthe
meaningof section40;or
(b)who,withintentiontofurthertheactivity
ofaterroristorganization,arranges,manages
orassistsinarrangingormanagingameeting
whichheknowsis
(i)tosupporttheterroristorganization,or

(ii)to further the activity of the terrorist

organization,or

(iii)tobeaddressedbyapersonwhoassociates
orprofessestobeassociatedwiththeterrorist
organization;or

(c) who, withintentiontofurthertheactivityofa

terrorist organization, addresses a meeting for the
purposeof encouraging support for the terrorist
organizationortofurtheritsactivity.
(2) A person,who commits the offence relating to
supportgivento aterrorist organization under sub
section (1), shall be punishable with imprisonment
foratermnotexceedingtenyears,orwithfine,or
withboth.

960] In order to see whether the ingredients of the offence

punishableunderSections38and39ofUAPAareestablished,itis
necessarytoscrutinize thedocumentsseizedfromthepossessionof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
782 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accusedno.1MaheshTirkii.e.naxalpamphlets(Art.139to141),the
eightpagesofnaxalliteraturealongwithtypewrittendocumentsof
undertrialprisonermaoistleaderNarayanSanyalatArt.130Aseized
fromthepersonalsearchofaccusedno.4PrashantRahiand text
documents Arts.A17 to A21 retrieved from 16 GB memorycard of
Sandisk company seized from the personal search of accused no.3
HemMishraandtextdocuments,photographs,videoclipsfoundin
the electronic gadgets (Arts.1 to 41) at Page nos.1 to 247 and
Arts.147to164ofExh.267seizedfromthehousesearchofaccused
no.6Saibababroughtonrecordbytheprosecution.

961] Toprovethesaidallegationsagainsttheaccusedpersons
prosecutionhasreliedonthefollowingtextdocumentswhichareas
under:

1] A document at Art.A17 retrieved from 16 GB

memorycardseizedfromthepossessionofaccused
no.3HemMishraisaletterwritteninHindilanguage
byoneLalSalamJ.V.addressedto LalSalam. On
perusalofcontentsofsaidletteritrevealsthatitisin
respectofJanaSanghathanandJanaAndolanandit
iswrittenthatsomeproblemsarisesinprogressand
developmentoftheorganizationandhenceitreveals
the further activities of banned organization CPI
(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF.

2] On perusal of document at Art.A18 which is

alsoinHindilanguageaddressedtoJanSanghathan
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
783 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

and Sanyukta Morcha by N.R.B., it reveals that

there were suggestions to make effort about
strengthening and expanding the party and to
struggleagainstrepression,indevelopingcampaigns
and unlawfulorganization andlastlytosupport all
antiimperialist struggles and peoples' wars on the
internationallevel.Further,fromthecontentsofthe
saiddocumentitisclearthattherewasarevolution
bytheCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)andthey
were struggling armed rebellion against the
Government and it is the great achievement
developed in the form of Krantikari Jana Andolan.
FromthesaiddocumentitisclearthatN.R.B.,apart
ofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontal
organization RDF were trying to furthering their
terrorist activities like armed rebellion against the
Government through PLGA and Krantikari Jana
Aandolanalloverthecountry.

962] AdocumentatArt.A19retrievedfromthe16GBmemory
cardofSandiskcompanyseizedfromthepossessionofaccusedno.3
Hem Mishra is a letter addressed to Dear friends Red Salute by
Sahyadri State Committee of Maharashtra CPI (Maoist) titled as
Oppose the Government's ongoing war against the people of
Garhchirolidistrict. Inthesaiddocumentdetailhistoryalongwith
dateandtimeregardingkillingofaround17naxalsinencounterby
Gadchirolipoliceisgivenasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
784 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1] On4.4.2013fivemaoistswerekillednearBatparvillage.
2] On20.1.2013policekilledsixmaoistsnamelyShankarLakda,
a member of Divisional Committee, Mohan Kowase, Acm,
Vinod Kodape Acm,Geeta Usendi, Platoon Deputy
Commander, Juru Mattami and Raju Gavde at Govindgaon
village.
3] On 12.4.2013 at village Sindesur police encircled and
indiscrimatelyfiredonajansabha(publicmeeting)killing6
people namely Sukhdev, Varlu Gave and Kalidas Duru Hidko
andComradeKailashamemberofTippagarharea committee was
killedwhenhecamedowntosavethe people.

963] Furtheraround35incidentsofbeatingofnaxals/members
ofCPI(Maoist)atthehandsofGadchirolipolicearegiven. Inthe
saiddocumentitisfurthermentionedthataround10000policestaff
alongwith modern weapons like AK47, LMG, SLR are equipped,
however, the PLGA on the other hand having old weapons like
Bharmarandaxe.Inthesaidletterappealwasmadetofightagainst
paramilitaryforces,commandoforcestostopGreenHuntOperation
launchedbytheGovernment.Lastly,inthesaiddocumentitisstated
thatmassmovementand armedstrugglebothareequallyimportant
andarenecessaryfortherevolution.

964] Adocumentat Art.A21 ofExh.266whichwasretrieved

fromthe16GBmemorycardofSandiskCompanyseizedfromthe
possession of accused no.3 HemMishra addressedto Comrade by
one Jaddu and Prakash dated 1st August 2013 and the relevant
portionsofthisdocumentarereproducedasunder:
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
785 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

We have received 1.5 lakhs once and 75

thousandatanothertimesofarafterthearrestofthe
comrade.Butweincurredseverallakhsofrupeeson
thecontinuousprogrammesandactivities.Wehave
incurredaloanof2.5lakhsasofnow.Everypassing
daybringsinnewexpenditure.Wedocollectfunds
buttherangeofouractivitiesissoveryhighthatwe
are not in a position to meet all expenses through
collections.

Weurgentlyneedfundsunderthefollowingheads:
Prisonercomradeshealthandotherlegalchargeson
cases(wearelookingafterhere):2laks.
Conference(apartfromwhatwecanbecollected):3
Lakhs.
Bookswearepublishingnow:2lakhs.
(Formorebookswecouldcollect1lakh)Butneed2
lakhsmoretopublishtheremainingbooks.
Loantobecleared:2.5lakhs.
Onearrestedseniorcomradeslifepartnerneedsat
least1lakhshere.
Forourteam(next6months)torunourselvesand
activitiesplannedweneed4lakhsatleast.
Therefore we need a minimum of 13 lakhs
immediately to meet various urgent needs and
activities.

965] From this documents it reveal that accused no.3 Hem

Mishraonthedirectionsofaccusedno.6Saibabawascarrying16GB
memorycard containing such documents to meet the underground
naxalitesinAbuzamadforestofGadchirolidistrictandforcollection
of funds for the development of organization and to support the
terroristorganizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF
withintentiontofurthertheterroristactivities.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
786 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

966] FromtheevidenceofP.W.9RajuAtramitisclearthat at
the instance of absconding lady naxal Narmadakka he alongwith
accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote had been to
Ballarsha railwaystation to receive the members of banned
organisationandfurtherhandedovercashamountofRs.5lacstothe
membersofbannedorganisationatBallarsharailwaystationandat
that time accused no.1 MaheshTirki and no.2Pandu Narote were
accompaniedwithhim.

967] Thedocumentatpageno.183ofExh.267retrievedfrom
theharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba
havingpathEx4/cy47513Ex4/c/onAzadisaPressstatementof
CommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)CentralCommitteeNorthRegional
Bureau. ItisabouttheredsalutestoMartyrscom.Azadandcom.
Hem Pandey and suggested to take revenge for the killings of the
comrades by the khaki clad (i.e. Police) fascist gangs of AP
Government and allegations are made against the Andhra Pradesh
Governmentaboutkillingofthosecomrades.Fromthisstatementit
isclearthatoneAjaySpokespersonofCPI(Maoist)hadwrittenthis
pressstatementtofurthertheactivitiesoforganization.

968] The document at Page no.57ofExh.267retrievedfrom

theharddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba
having path Exh.4/c/for said/working Directory 201/New

Folder/final months after correction/Manjeera/core , titled as

Meetingof Core of A3/A4on Oct2nd and 3rd2006contains
various resolutions regarding the suggestions of demands for the
campaign of building A3 and A4, mass movement, displacement
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
787 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

movementandfundsandbudgetsforthedevelopmentofA3andA4
committeesofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)workinginvarious
StatesofIndia anditismentionedthatPrakashi.e.accusedno.6
Saibaba alongwith his companion must take serious attempts at
consultationonallA4FCdecisionsandothermattersconcerningthe
organization. This document shows the further activities to
strengthentheorganization.

969] The document at page no.78 of Exh.267 having path

Exh.4/OLDEHD/OLD/All12345/ILPS/DearArman,Exh.267 isa
letteraddressedto DearArman whereinitismentionedthatwhen
accused no.6 Saibaba was in London, Holland and Birmingham
duringtheirdiscussionfollowingproposalswereagreed.

Some representatives from India from anti

displacement front, political prisoners and RDF,
possiblyanticastemovementwilljoinILPSTIA.

AninternationalteamofILPStovisitareasofanti
displacementmovementsinIndiainMarch2008to
comeoutwithareportforinternationalpropaganda.
TheteamwillalsotovisitChhattisgarhinthearea
effected by Salwa Judum, an area of indigenous
peoplemostseriousaffectedinamajorway.Other
importantareas,amongothers,wouldbeNandigram
andSingurWestBengal,Kalingnar,Jagatisgapurand
KashipurinOrissa,andJharkhand.Theteamneeds
toinIndiaforatleast15days.
Followed by the teams report, an International
Public Hearing may be conducted as suggested by
Comrade Jose Maria Sison, with internationally
renownedpeopleasjurysimultaneouslyfromIndia
and London sessions through video conferencing.
Butasectionoftheinternationaljurybeablepresent
inIndia.
ILPS to aid and promote the formation of
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
788 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

international Solidarity Committees supporting and

taking up the issues of Indian Antidisplacement
movement particularly in Europe and Americas to
start with. The international monopoly corporate
housesthatdirectlydisplace,kill,maim,rapepeople
in India are to be targeted in a big way through
campaign.
ComradeVaravaraRaohasagreedtoparticipatein
theTIA.

970] This document shows that there are some international

programmesofILPSorganisationandattheendoftheletteraccused
no.6Saibabahasinformedtocontactsomemembersattheendof
eachmailcontainedsothattheywillunderstandtheimportanceof
theorganisationandatthefootofthislettertheemailofaccused
no.6Saibabaisgiven.

971] Adocumentatpageno.81ofExh.267isaletteronthe
letterheadofATIK(AvrupaTurkiyeliIscilerKonfedersasyonu),Turque
andEuropeaddressedtoaccusedno.6G.N.SaibabafromChairperson
ofInternationalRelationCommissionATIKwhereinitismentioned
thatsaidATIKlaunchedacampaignforthesolidaritywiththeIndian
peopleandpeople'smovementagainstOperationGreenHunt(OGH)
a scheme of Indian Government and invited Senior Maoist leaders
fromIndiatoEuropeandalsotalkedtoTurkeyaboutthejoiningof
Maoistleaders.Fromthisletteritrevealsthataccusedno.6Saibaba
isanactivememberofCPI(Maoist)Indiaandheisincontactandhas
relations with other Maoist organisations working in foreign
countries.

972] AdocumentatPageno.88ofExh.267retrievedfromthe
harddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibabaisa
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
789 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

letteraddressedtoDearComradebyPrakashinwhichitissuggested
to celebrate Lenin's Birth Day and formation day of CPI (ML) to
furtheritsactivities.

973] Adocumentatpageno.92ofExh.267inwhichtherecitals
wereshownagainstimperialism,againstmodernfascism,struggle,
organize and construct the party written by Communist Party
MaoistItaly,France,TurkeyNorthKurdistanandsuggestedtoinstall
amidtherebelyouthoftheimperialistbanlieues,constructingyouth
revolutionaryorganismsandtogivesupportandorientationtothe
studentstruggles,immigrants,lodgementoccupants,tothepopular
strugglesontheterritoriesagainstmilitarybases.Attheendofletter
thereismentionofCommunistPartyMaoistItaly,CommunistParty
MaoistFrance,CommunistPartyMaoistTurkeyNorthKurdistan.
Fromthisletter,itshowsthattheCPI(Maoist)isworkinginvarious
countriestofurthertheiractivities.

974] AdocumentatPageno.94ofExh.267isaPressRelease
issued by Ramanna Secretary DKSZC CPI(Maoist) titled as The
claimmadebythegovernmentthat7Naxalswerekilledbythe
CoBRA, Greyhounds and SPOs in an encounter between the
Maoists and the police on 10 th November 2009 is completely
false!. In the said letter there wasappeal to all the democratic,
progressiveandpropeopleorganisationsandindividuals,democratic
andcivilrightsorganizationsandactivists,writersandintellectuals,
journalists,studentsandyouthtocomeforwardandmakeallefforts
tostopthisgenocideandbrutalrepressioncommittedonthepeople
bytheIndiangovernmentandtopunishthepoliceofficersguiltyof
thesecrimes.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
790 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

975] A document at Page no.97 of Exh.267 titled as

Communist Party of India (Maoist) by Gudsa Usendi,
Spokesperson, Dandakaranya Special Zonal Committee, CPI
(Maoist) headed by Observe Martyrs Week From July 28 to
August3!RedHomagetoOurPartysForefoundersandBeloved
TeachersComradesCharuMazumdarandKanhaiChatterjee!and
furtheritismentionedthatByvirtueofthesesacrifices,revolutionary
movementhasbeenadvancingraisingthesloganNaxalbariEkHi
Rasta, with the aim of building liberated areas through areawise
seizure ofpoliticalpower. Fromthisdocumentitisclearthatthe
Dandakaranya Special Zonal Committee of CPI (Maoist) a banned
organisationmadeincitementtowageaagainsttheGovernmentand
choose a way of naxal with slogan Naxalbari Ek Hi Rasta and
oppose the scheme of Government i.e. Operation Green Hunt.
From this document it further reveals that Gudsa Usendi,
Spokesperson of Dandakaranya Special Zonal Committee, CPI
(Maoist)haswrittensloganNaxalbariEkHiRastaanddecidedJuly
28 is an important day to commemorate the sacrifices of all the
Martyrstofurthertheactivitiesoforganization.

976] AdocumentatPageno.99ofExh.267titledasConceptof
Revolutionary Mass Organizations (RMOs) reveals that no
revolutioncanadvanceuntilandunlessthevastmassesaremobilized
toactivelyparticipateonamassscaleinitandnotmerelystayas
passiveobservers.FromthisdocumentitisclearthatCPI(Maoist)
is conducting armed struggle and attempting to commit offences
underterroristactandtofurthertheactivitiesoforganizationandto
supporttheterroristorganization.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
791 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

977] A document at page no.114 of Exh.267 titled as

ExpressingSolidaritywithCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist)
wherein it is appealed to continue on the path of Comrade Azad,
spokespersonforCommunistPartyofIndia(Maoist).Thisdocument
shows the further activities of the organization against the
Government.

978] AdocumentatPagenos.119ofExh.267isaninterviewof
accusedno.6SaibabaunderthetitleasMaoiststrategyinIndia
andfromthesaiddocumentitisclearthataccusedno.6Saibabais
the deputy secretary ofthe RevolutionaryDemocratic Front,an all
IndianFederationofrevolutionaryorganizationsandwasworkingfor
theexpansionoftheorgainsationtofurtheritsactivities.

979] Adocumentatpageno.183ofExh.267havingpath Ex
4/cy47513Ex4/c/on Azad is a Press statement of Communist
PartyofIndia(Maoist)CentralCommitteeNorthRegionalBureauis
abouttheredsalutestoMartyrscom.Azadandcom.HemPandey
andsuggestedtotakerevengeforthekillingsofthecomradesbythe
khakiclad(i.e.Police)fascistgangsofAPGovernmentandallegations
are made against the AndhraPradeshGovernment about killingof
thosecomrades.

980] A document at page no.210 of Exh.267 titled as

Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF), The First All India
Conference is a Press Release dated 23 April 2012 held at
Hyderabad,Telanganawhichwaswrittenbyaccusedno.6Saibaba,in
whichitismentionedthatheistheDeputySecretaryofRDF,afrontal
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
792 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

organisation of CPI (Maoist). Some recitals of the document are

reproducedasunder:

981] Several important resolutions were passed by the First

ConferenceofRDFtoday. Theseincludedaresolutioncondemning
operationGreenHuntandIndianStatesWaronPeopleagainstforced
displacementofpeoplebytheGovernmentandprivatecorporations
inthenameofdevelopment,resolutiondemandingtheunconditional
release of all political prisoners resolution in solidarity with the
national liberation struggles of Kashmir, Nagalim, Manipur, Aasam
andotheroppressednationalitiesresolutioncondemningimperialist
aggression against Iraq, Afganisthan, Iran, Syria, North Korea and
other sovereign countries. A new AllIndia Committee has been
electedbytheConferenceconsistingofeighteenexecutivemembers
fromthirteenStates.

982] AdocumentatArticle159ofExh.267isareviseddraftas
per EC suggestions titled as, Draft Manifesto of Revolutionary
DemocraticFront(RDF). TheconstitutiondraftofRevolutionary
Democratic Front (RDF) shows that there are different types of
organizations in different States which are (a) Revolutionary
DemocraticFront(RDF)inEnglish,(b)KrantikariJanwadiMorcha
(RDF) in Hindi and (c) in different states the name of the
organisationshouldbewrittenintherespectivelanguagesbutRDF
shouldbekeptwithinbrackets.

983] Fromallthesedocumentsitrevealsthataccusednos.1to
6weretheactivemembersofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)and
itsfrontalorganizationRDFandtheywereassociatedthemselvesor
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
793 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

professedtobeassociatedwithaterroristorganizationwithintention
to further its activities in the different State of India and in other
countries.

DocumentsshowingthefurtheractivitiesofCPI(Maoist)India
withfraternalorganizationsofothercountriesfoundinthe
electronicgadgets(Arts.1to41)seizedfromthehousesearchof
accusedno.6Saibaba.

984] A document at page no.136 of Exh.267 titled as

PrabhathamwillnotdieshowsthatthegenocideinSriLankaon
Tamils is the continuation of aggression on the fighting people of
Pelestine,AfghanistanandIraqanditisallegedthatthisgenocideon
the Eelam struggle under the leadership of V Prabhakaran was
supportedbyIndianGovernment.

985] AdocumentatPageno.137ofExh.267undertheheadof
Office of the Prime Minister Transnational Government of Tamil
Eelam,875,AvenueoftheAmericas,Suite1001,NewYork,NY1001,
USA,dated19February2011titledasWesharethisJoyfulmoment
withthepeopleofEgypt!.

986] AdocumentatPageno.139ofExh.267undertheheadof
Office of the Prime Minister Transnational Government of Tamil
Eelam,875,AvenueoftheAmericas,Suite1001,NewYork,NY1001,
USA, dated 8 March 2011 titled as Vehement condemnation of
Despicable Attack on Member of Parliament Sivagunanam in Sri
Lanka!.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
794 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

987] CPI(Maoist)Indiasuggestedtoconductadebatewithin
theMaoistcampsworldwideandtothateffectitismentionedinthe
saidletterthatWearesendingthisOpenLettertoyourPartysoasto
conductapolemicaldebatebothwithinyourPartyandtheMaoist
revolutionary camp worldwide. This step has become necessary
becauseoftheveryseriousdevelopmentsthathavetakenplaceinthe
courseofdevelopmentoftherevolutioninNepalthathaveabearing
on our understanding of imperialism and proletarian revolution as
wellasthestrategytacticstobepursuedbyMaoistrevolutionariesin
the contemporary world; there is also serious deviation from the
ideology of MLM. Hence these are no more the internal matters
concerningyourPartyalone.

988] ThereismentionofNaxalbariinthesaidopenletterby
CPI (Maoist) India to the Comrades of CPI (Maoist) from other
countries.

989] Fromallthesedocumentsitrevealsthattheaccusednos.1
to 6 associated themselves or professed to be associated with a
terroristorganizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF
withintentiontofurtheractivitiesofCPI(Maoist)Indiawithfraternal
organizationsofothercountries.

990] Inordertoprovetheincitementonthepartofaccused,
prosecutionreliedonfollowingvideoclipsfoundinelectronicgadgets
(Arts.1to41)seizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba:

a] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
795 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

LAAL/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_2 armed naxals in

uniformsareseencomingforgatheringforfunction
in jungle and greeting each other and many red
banners are seen and on one banner name of
comrade Janki (Anuradha Gandhi) Amar Rahe is
seen and further the gathered armed naxals and
other peoples shouted the slogans as Bharat ki
Communist Party Maowadi Zindabad,Bharat kiNav
Janwadi Kranti Zindabad and killing of police
personsbyarmednaxalsisseen.

b] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

LAAL/ VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3 armed naxals in
uniformsareseentakingtrainingandexercisingin
jungleandbackgroundsoundofCPI(Maoist)party
spokespersonAazadplayedandhestatesaboutthe
CPI (Maoist) armed strength and their tactics and
furthertheinterviewsofonenaxalabouttheKudru
ambushandCPI(Maoist)promotionalvideoisseen
howtheambushonpolicepartyisexecuted.

c] In the videoclip having path Exh.16/(1)

NAXILISTES/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1armednaxalsin
uniform are seen walking in jungle and they are
campaigningandattendingpublicmeetingshowing
naxaltacticsinjungle.

d] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_20
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
796 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

10/Kutul_Maad/kutul bhoomkal_2010 armed

naxalsinuniformsalongwiththevillagersareseen
gatheredinjungletocelebratethe10thanniversary
ofBhoomkalandtheyareshoutingwiththeslogans
as Lal Salam, Mahan Bhoomkal Zindabad, Mahan
Bhoomkal Shahidonko Lal Salam and further one
armed naxal seen addressing to the gathering of
around2000to3000peoplesandarmednaxals.

e] In the videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_20
10/Vayanar_ EBT/1/ DSCN4236, armed naxals in
uniformsalongwiththevillagersareseengathered
injungleareshoutingwiththeslogansasJantana
sarkar ko majbut karo,Dandkaranyako aadhar
elakeme badal dalo,Bharat ki communist party
maowadizindabad.

f] In the videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_20
10/Vayanar_EBT/2/Bhoomakal_2010, armed
naxalsinuniformsalongwiththevillagersareseen
marching in jungle with red coloured banners and
flags and some green coloured dressed girls seen
dancingandsingingonthestage.Furtheritisseen
around 2 to 3 thousand villagers gathering along
with armed CPI (Maoist) naxals and one naxal
speaksandmanyredcolouredbannersandpictures,
naxal martyr monument is seen around there and
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
797 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

furtheritisseenthatCPI(Maoist)armednaxalsare
dancing andonenaxaltakesvideoshootingofthe
dance.

g] In the videoclip having path Exh.3/films/

S1/RDF/1/video_TS, VTS _01_1 accused no.6
Saibaba is seen taking part and others are singing
song on death of Shankar and singing slogans Lal
Salam Lal Salam. Slogan Lal Salam is used by
naxalsandmembersofbannedorganisationRDFand
hence it is clearthataccusedno.6isamemberof
banned organisation CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organisation RDF and inciting the people with
slogansLalSalamLalSalam.

h] InvideocliphavingpathExh.3/films/s1/RDF
/1/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_1, somemenandwomen
raised the slogans as Shahidonko Lal Salam,
Navjanwadi Kranti Zindabad, Ek Hi Rasta Ek Hi
RastaNaxalbariEkHiRasta.ThesloganNaxalbari
Ek Hi Rasta raised in this video is resolved as a
sloganofRDFinArt.157titledasJointMeetingof
AIPRFandSFPRwrittenbyRajkishoreSecretaryof
Adhoc Executive Committee Revolutionary
DemocraticFront(RDF)on20thMay2005.

i] In videoclip having path Exh.3/films/s1/RDF /

2/VIDEO_ TS/VTS_01_1, the dignitaries from
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
798 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

differentpartsincludingaccusedno.6G.N. Saibaba
is seen on dais along with Sayad Gilani, and
explaining about themanifestoofRDFandfurther
accused no.6 Saibaba have seen supporting the
Navjanvadi Kranti, further he have invited Arun
PareiratoreleasethebookSCRIPTINGTHECHANGE
WRITTENBYANURADHAGANDHYandhasreleased
thebook.Fromthecontentsofthisvideoitisclear
that Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) is also
knownasKrantikariJanwadiMorcha(RDF)inHindi
language and this fact is mentioned in draft
manifestoArt.159writtenbyaccusedno.6Saibaba.

j] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

LAAL/VIDEO _TS/VTS_01_1 armed naxals in
uniformsareseenwalkinginjungleandbackground
sound of CPI (Maoist) Party spokesperson Aazad
played and states that Maoism teaches usthat self
preservation is possible only through war. This
shows that accused no.6 Saibaba is working to
influencethepeopleforjoiningthewaragainstthe
Governmentandincitingthepeople.

k] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

LAAL/ VIDEO _TS/VTS_01_2 armed naxals in
uniformsareseencomingforgatheringforfunction
in jungle and greeting each other also many red
bannersareseenandonone banneritisseen the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
799 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

namecomradeJanki(AnuradhaGandhi)AmarRahe
and further the gathered armed naxals and other
peoplesshoutedtheslogansasBharatkiCommunist
Party Maowadi Zindabad, Bharat ki Nav Janwadi
KrantiZindabadandencounterbyarmednaxalsin
whichpolicepersonswerekilledisseen.Contentsof
the said video shows that the members of CPI
(Maoist) and its frontal organisation RDF are
propagatingtheterroristactandunlawfulactivities
amongstthepeopleinwhichpolicepersonnelwere
killed by them and accused no.6 Saibaba has
promotedthesaidunlawfulactivitiestoinciteorabet
thepeople

l] In videoclip having path Exh.8/(1)MATI_KE

LAAL/ VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_3 armed naxals in
uniformsareseentakingtrainingoffiringinjungle
and background sound of CPI (Maoist) party
spokespersonAazadplayedandhestatesaboutthe
CPI (Maoist) armed strength and their tactics the
interviewsofonenaxalabouttheKudruambushand
CPI (Maoist) promotional video is seen how the
ambushonpolicepartyisexecuted.Thesaidvideo
clipisfoundinpossessionofaccusedno.6Saibaba
which shows that the revolutionary movement is
strengtheningthestrugglesandinitiativethroughthe
people's war against Government through activities
ofCPI(Maoist).
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
800 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

m] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_20
10/Kutul_Maad/ kutul bhoomkal _2010 armed
naxalsinuniformsalongwiththevillagersareseen
gatheredinjungletocelebratethe10thanniversary
ofBhoomkalandtheyareshoutingwiththeslogans
as Lal Salam, Mahan Bhoomkal Zindabad, Mahan
Bhoomkal Shahidonko Lal Salam. Contents of the
video shows the activities of the naxals with the
villagerstopropagatetherevolutionaryideologyand
strategy of armed struggle of banned organisation
CPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationRDF.

n] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_20
10/Vayanar_EBT/1/DSCN4236, armednaxalsin
uniformsalongwiththevillagersareseengathered
in jungle are shouting withthe slogansas Jantana
sarkar ko majbut karo, Dandkaranyako aadhar
elakeme badal dalo,Bharat ki communist party
maowadi zindabad. Contents of the video shows
aboutstrengtheningtherevolutionarystruggle.

o] In videoclip having path Exh.4/OLD

EHD/OGH/DKMATTERS/Bhoomkalprogramme_20
10/Vayanar_EBT/2/Bhoomakal_ 2010, armed
naxalsinuniformsalongwiththevillagersareseen
marching in jungle with red coloured banners and
flags and some green coloured dressed girls seen
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
801 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

dancingandsingingonthestage.Itisseenaround2
to3thousandvillagersgatheringalongwitharmed
CPI(Maoist)naxalsandonenaxalspeaksandmany
red coloured banners and pictures, naxal martyr
monumentisseenaroundthereanditisseenthat
CPI (Maoist) armed naxals are dancing and one
naxaltakesvideoshootingofthedance.

p] In videoclip having path Exh.3/RDF

Conference video/9DVD/VIDEO_TS/VTS_01_4,
comrade Rajkishore is seen declaring new office
bearersoftheRDFandfurthercomradeVaravararao
declaresasaPresident,comradeGhantiprasadamas
aVicePresidentandaccusedno.6Saibabadeclares
as a Joint Secretary along with comrade Jeetan
Marandi who was in jail, also declares as a Joint
Secretary, comrade Ajay as a Treasurer. From the
contents of the video it is clear that accused no.6
Saibaba was declared as Joint Secretary including
othermembersofRDF.

991] On viewing above videoclips it is clear that the armed

naxalsofCPI(Maoist)wereparticipatinginsingingthesongswhile
dancingandsomeofthemwerearmedwithgunsalongwithbanners
ofRDF,afrontalorganizationofCPI(Maoist)intheirhandsandthey
wereattendingthemeetingsandfoundaddressingpeopletojointhe
organizationtosupporttheterroristorganizationCPI(Maoist)andits
frontal organization RDF to further its activities against the
Government.Afterconsideringtheabovetextdocuments,videoclips
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
802 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

andphotographsitisclearthattheaccusednos.1to6weremembers
of CPI (Maoist) and its frontal organization RDF and they were
holdingmeetingsforbannedorganisationandaddressingthepeople
andincitingthepeopleforresortingtheviolenceandcreatepublic
disorder and sending and receiving vital communication for
strengtheningtheirorganizationfordoingtheterroristactasdefined
underSection15ofUAPA.Hence,itisclearthataccusednos.1to6
weretheactivemembersofbannedorganisationCPI(Maoist)andits
frontal organization and they have supported the terrorist
organisation with intention to further the activities of terrorist
organizationbyarrangingandmanagingthemeetingsandassisted
themembersofbannedorganizationtofurthertheterroristactivities.
Assuchprosecutionhasprovedthecasefortheoffencepunishable
u/s38and39ofUAPAreadwithSection120BofIPCagainstaccused
nos.1to6.

992] After considering entire oral, documentary and

circumstantialevidenceonrecordtheprosecutionhasprovedbeyond
reasonabledoubtfollowingfactsandcircumstancesagainstaccused
nos.1 to 6 who are active members of banned organization CPI
(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF:

I] Thaton22.8.2013accusednos.1MaheshTirki,
No.2 Pandu Narote and No.3 Hem Mishra were
arrestedatnearAheriBusStandatsecludedplace
andpersonalsearchofaccusednos.1MaheshTirki,
No.2PanduNaroteandNo.3HemMishrawastaken
byPoliceOfficerP.W.10AnilBadgujarandfromthe
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
803 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

personalsearchofaccusedno.3HemMishra,16GB
memorycardofsandiskcompanyandkodakcamera
and other articles (i.e. Arts.20 to 38) have been
recovered.

II] From the personal search of accused no.1

MaheshTirkiarticleslike,threepamphletsregarding
banned CPI (Maoist) organization, one Micromax
company mobile, one pocket purse containing
Rs.60/, platform ticket dated 28521013 were
found. Thereafter, from the possession of accused
no.2 Pandu Narote, platform ticket of Ballarsha
Railway dated 2852013, one mobile of Samsung
company, and cash of Rs.1400/ and his election
identitycardandschoolleavingandbirthcertificate
were found and those were seized under seizure
panchanamaatExh.137.

III] During investigation, accused nos.1 Mahesh

and No.2 Pandu expressed their desire to make
confessional statements before the Magistrate and
accordinglytheywereproducedbeforetheJ.M.F.C.,
Aheri (P.W.21 Nileshwar Vyas) and thereafter after
complyingtheprovisionsofSection164oftheCr.P.C.
and Criminal Manual framed by the Honourable
HighCourt,J.M.F.C.,Aheri(P.W.21NileshwarVyas)
recorded confessional statements of accused nos.1
Mahesh and No.2 Pandu and in their confessional
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
804 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

statement both accused nos.1 Mahesh and No.2

PanduNarotestatedthatpriortoincidentforthree
tofourtimesattheinstanceofundergroundlady
naxal Narmadakka they had been to Ballarsha
Railway Station to receive the members ofbanned
organization to take them safely within the forest
area of Gadchiroli District to have meeting with
underground naxal leaders and on 22.8.2013 they
had been to Ballarsha Railway Station to receive
accusedno.3HemMishraandtotakehiminforest
areaofGadchirolitohavemeetingwithunderground
lady naxal Narmadakka and when they came at
Aheri Bus Stop they were caught by police and
defence of the accused that accused no.3 Hem
MishraatBallarshaRailwayStationisappearstobe
false.

V] The Confessional Statements of accused no.1

Mahesh Tirki and no.2 Pandu Narote are
corroborated by the evidence of P.W.9 Raju Atram
whoinhisexaminationdeposedthatattheinstance
ofladynaxalNarmadakkahehadbeentoBallarsha
RailwayStationon29.5.2013alongwithRs.5lakhs
whichweregivenbyladynaxalNarmadakkatobe
handedovertomembersofbannedorganizationand
when he went at Ballarsha Railway Station
alongwithcashamountofRs.5lakhson29.5.2013
accused no.1 MaheshTirki andno.2Pandu Narote
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
805 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

werepresentthereandaccusedno.2PanduNarote
cameandtookthemoneyandhandedoveramount
ofRs.5lakhstothemembersofbannedorganization
atBallarshaRailwayStation.

From the above Confessional Statements

ofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarote
andseizureofnaxalpamphletsArts.139to141from
accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki it is clear that accused
no.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotemaintained
livecontactswithundergroundnaxalsandmembers
of banned organization CPI(Maoist)anditsfrontal
organization RDF and as such they are active
membersofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)andits
frontalorganisationRDF.

VI] The prosecution has proved that during

house search of accused no.6 Saibabai extensive
electronicgadgets(Articles1to41)i.e.CDs,DVDs,
pendrives, memorycard, harddiscs containing
writing text of speeches and video clips of naxal
leaderandactivistsexhortingviolenceandrevolution
againsttheGovernmentestablishedbylawbymeans
of armed rebellion were seized and from the
possession of accused no.3 Hem Mishra 16 GB
memorycardcontainingelectronicdataintextformat
inciting people and the members of banned
organization to resort to violence and cause public
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
806 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

disorderandlettersaddressedtoundergroundnaxal
by accused no.6 Saibaba for taking guidance for
strenghtening the banned organization RDF were
seized.

VII] From the videoclips found in the hard

discs,CD,DVDseizedfromhousesearchofaccused
no.6 Saibaba, it is clear that he was a Assistant
Secretary, Deputy Secretary, Joint Secretary and, at
presentheisVicePresidentofRDF,whichisfrontal
organizationofCPI(Maoist)bannedorganizationand
inseveralvideoclipsaccusednos.3HemMishra,no.4
PrashantRahiandno.6Saibabawerefoundattending
meeting conducted by RDF, which is frontal
organizationofbannedCPI(Maoist)organization.

VIII] There are several letters addressed

byaccusedno.6Saibabasometimeinhisownname
andsometimebyhispseudonamePrakashtothe
membersofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)andits
frontalorganizationRDF.ThedocumentatPageno.1
ofExh.267SecretaryReportclearlyshowsthatRDF
is hardly working for release of members of CPI
(Maoist) and several letters written by members of
CPI(Maoist)totheComradeswerefoundinthehard
disc seized from the house search of accused no.6
Saibaba. Further, accused no.6 Saibaba addressed
several letters to fraternal organization of other
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
807 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

countriesonbehalfofCPI(Maoist). Fromthisitis
clear that RDF is a frontal organization of CPI
(Maoist).

IX] FromtheCDRdetailsofmobileSIM
card bearing Nos.9873877513 and 8860601278
belongingtoaccusedno.3HemMishra,mobileSIM
card bearing No.8800100490 belonging to accused
no.6 Saibaba and mobile SIM card bearing
No.8394875017belongingtoaccusedno.4Prashant
Rahi, it is clear that on 12122012,572013,87
2013,972013,3172013,332013,842013,47
2013,1592012,1072013,282013,1392012,4
72013and1482013theywerecontactedwitheach
other and last location of their mobiles was in
premisesofDelhiUniversityandthereafteraftertwo
days accusednos.4Prashant Rahi and5VijayTirki
werefoundinGadchiroli.

X] It is important to note that in the

statementrecordedu/s313ofCr.P.Cofaccusednos.1
to6theymerelydeniedthatnothingwasseizedfrom
theirpossessionandtheelectronicdatacontainedin
electronic gadgets is false, fabricated and
manipulated and further accused nos.3, 4 and 6
denied that they have any contact with each other
andthesaiddenialisfalseoneasfromCDRofmobile
SIM of accusednos.3,4and6it isclear that they
wereincontactwitheachother.Inthepresentcase
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
808 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

accused have been charged for the offence of

conspiracyu/s120BofIPCandSec.18ofUAPA. In
provingthe offence ofconspiracydirect evidenceis
hardly available and conspiracy is to be proved by
circumstantialevidence.

993] It is well settled that when the case is based upon

circumstantialevidencemeredenialorfalsestatementbyaccusedu/s
313 Cr.P.C. is considered to be additional link and this has been
observedbytheApexCourtincaseofRaviralaLaxmaiahvs.State
ofAndhraPradeshreportedin(2013)9SupremeCourtCases283
whereinitisobservedthat
A. Criminal Trial Circumstantial Evidence
FailuretoexplainincriminatingcircumstancesIsan
additional link to chain of circumstances False
explanationornoexplanationofferedbyaccusedto
incriminating circumstance put to him When
accused is last seen with deceased in his house,
accused is dutybound to explain circumstances
under which deceased died Failure to explain or
false explanation would create a strong suspicion
about guilt of accused Criminal Procedure Code,
1973,S.313.

994] In view of above prosecution has proved beyond

reasonable doubt that accused no.1 to 6 on or prior to 12.9.2013
within India hatched criminal conspiracy to wage war against the
Government of India and to collect people with the intention of
wagingwaragainsttheGovernmentofIndia,tooverawebymeansof
criminalforcetheGovernmentofMaharashtraandtheGovernment
ofIndia,toshakeandreducethefaithofthecommoncitizeninits
democratic Government by large scale violence destruction oflives
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
809 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

and property and thereby destabilize the system of Government

established by law, to organize the spread of secessionist and
rebelliousthoughtsbyholdingconvertandsecretmeetings,tocollect
money in India for achieving the objects of the said criminal
conspiracy by illegal means, to continue unlawful activities of
Communist Party of India (Maoist) and its front organization
RevolutionaryDemocraticFront,forachievingtheobjectsofcriminal
conspiracy, to continue the activities of Terrorist Gang, banned
terroristorganizationorunlawfulassociation,singlyorjointlyasa
memberoftheTerrorist Gang&bannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)
anditsfrontalorganisationRDF toconspire,advocate,incite,abet
and knowingly facilitate the commission of a terrorist act and
unlawfulactivitiesbyuseofviolenceorotherunlawfulmeans,totake
partorcommitoradvocate,abetorincitethecommissionofunlawful
activities,beingthememberofabannedTerroristGang.

995] ItisprovedthataccusedNo.1MaheshTirki,no.2Pandu
Narote and no.4 Prashant Rahi in pursuance to the criminal
conspiracy with accused no.3 Hem Mishra and no.6 Saibaba were
found in possession of naxal literatures, pamphlets, letters,
correspondence, audiovideo, electronic material which were to be
usedforincitingthepeopletocreateviolencetocausepublicdisorder
andaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNaroteandno.5Vijay
TirkiwerereceivingthemembersofbannedterroristorganizationCPI
(Maoist) and its frontal organization RDF and were taking them
safelyandsecretlytoforestareawithintheGadchirolidistricttomeet
absconding underground naxals. Further they possessed naxal
literature,pamphlets,letters,correspondence,videoclipswhichwere
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
810 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

tobeusedforincitingpeopletocauseviolenceandpublicdisorder
and their activities were with intention to further the activities of
bannedorganizationCPImaoistanditsfrontalorganizationRDFand
theyshoweddisaffectiontowardstheCentralGovernmentandState
ofMaharashtraandtheprosecutionhasprovedthecaseagainstthe
accusednos.1to6fortheoffencespunishableunderSection13,18,
20,38,and39ofUAPAreadwithSection120BofIndianPenalCode
againstaccusednos.1to6beyondallreasonabledoubtsastheyare
activemembersofbannedorganizationCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontal
organizationRDFandtheprosecutionalsoprovedthatvalidsanction
hasbeenaccorded inSessionsCaseno.13/2014andSessionCase
no.130/2015.ForalltheabovereasonsIanswerPointNos.1to6in
theaffirmative.

996] Asaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNarote,no.3
HemMishra,no.4PrashantRahi,no.5VijayTirkiandno.6Saibaba
havebeenfoundguiltyfortheoffencespunishableunderSections13,
18,20,38and39ofUAPAr/wSection120BofIPCandasoffence
u/s18UAPAr/w120BofIPCandoffenceu/s20UAPAr/w120Bof
IPCarepunishableuptolifeimprisonment,Itakepausetohearthe
accusednos.1to6onthepointofsentence.Accusednos.1to6were
apprisedwiththefactthattheywouldgettimeformakingsubmission
onthepointofsentencebuttheyhavefiledapplicationatExh.493
andsubmittedthattheydon'twanttimeforhearingonthepointof
sentence. AdvocateShriGadlingforaccusednos.1to4and6and
Advocate Shri Samaddar for accused no.5 Vijay submitted that
accused do not want time for making submission on the point of
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
811 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

sentenceandprayedforpassingorderofsentence. Hence,Iheard
theaccusednos.1to6onthepointofsentence.
Sd/
Date:7.3.2017 (SuryakantS.Shinde)
SessionsJudge,Gadchiroli
Date7.3.2017,1.00p.m.

997] Accused no.1 Mahesh Tirki submitted that he is an

agriculturist, he has wife, daughter, two sons, mother and father
dependinguponhim.Hence,heprayedthatleniencymaybeshown
inthematterofawardingthesentence.

998] Accused no.2 Pandu Narote submitted that he is an

agriculturist, he has wife, daughter, mother and father depending
upon him. Hence, he prayed that leniency may be shown in the
matterofawardingthesentence.

999] Accused no.3 Hem Mishra submitted that he does not

wanttosayanything.

1000] Accusedno.4PrashantRahisubmittedthathedoes
notwanttosayanything.

1001] Accusedno.5VijayTirkisubmittedthathedoesnot
wanttosayanything.

1002] Accusedno.6Sabibabasubmittedthathedoesnot
wanttosayanything.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
812 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1003] ThelearnedAdvocateShriGadlingonbehalfofthe
accusedforaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2PanduNarote,no.3Hem
Mishra, no.4 Prashant Rahi and no.6 Saibaba and Advocate Shri
Samaddarforaccusedno.5VijayTirkisubmittedthattheydon'twant
tosubmitanythingonthepointofsentenceandleftthematteratthe
discretionoftheCourt.

1004] Learned Spl. P.P. Shri Sathianathan submitted that

from 31.12.2008 till todayseveralinnocent personswere killedby
naxalsonsuspicionthattheyarepoliceinformers. Furtherseveral
policepersonnelwerekilledinthefiringtookplacebetweennaxals
and police. Further huge public property was either damaged,
destroyedandburntbythenaxalsduringtheperiodfrom31.12.2008
tilltoday.Hence,heprayedforgrantingmaximumpunishmentoflife
imprisonmentforanoffencepunishableu/s18UAPAr/w120Bof
IPC and u/s 20 r/w 120B of IPC and maximum punishment for
offenceu/s13,38and39ofUAPAr/w120BofIPC.

Caseadjournedto3.00p.m.forpassingsentence.
Sd/
Date:7.3.2017 (SuryakantS.Shinde)
SessionsJudge,Gadchiroli
Date7.3.2017
Resumedat3.00p.m.

1005] Beforeproceedingfurtheritisnecessarytobearin
mindtheexactnatureoftheMaoistmovementinIndiaandforthat
the documents and records found in possession of the accused
themselvescanbelookedinto
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
813 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

MaoistMovementinIndia

1006] InthepresentcaseatPageno.41ofExh.267thereis
a document which is retrieved from the harddisc seized from the
house search of accused no.6 Saibaba titled as Interview with
G.N.Saibaba on the Revolutionary and Democratic Movements in
IndiaByKaFrank.Inthesaidinterviewaccusedno.6Saibabastated
abouttheoriginofMaoistMovementinIndia. Inreplytoquestion
no.3,whataccusedno.6Saibabahasstatedisreproducedasunder:

The Naxalite movement emerged in the late

1960sasaresponsetothemostoppressivesemifeudal,
semicolonial state that was put in place after the
transfer of power fromtheBritishcolonialiststothe
Indian feudal and comprador ruling classes. The
Naxalite movement should also be seen as a process
thatpermanentlychangedthepoliticalscenarioofthe
peoples movements by defining and establishing the
pathofIndianrevolution.

ThewordNaxalitecameafterthenameofthevillage
wherethefirststepstowardsarmedmobilizationwas
initiatedundertheleadershipofCharuMazumdar.In
May 1967 a village called Naxalbari in Jalpaiguri
districtofNorthBengalroseinrevolt.Simultaneously,
under the leadership of Kanai Chatterjee, the poor
peasantsandtribal/indigenouspeopleborderingthe
states of BengalBihar started organizing themselves.
Thisregionalsodevelopedintoamightyrevolutionary
movement.

Thispathbreakingeventisalsothebeginningofthe
polarizationoftherevolutionaryforcesononesideand
the revisionist forces on the other from among the
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
814 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

communist parties and groups that existed by then

throughoutIndia.ThatswhyitwascalledtheSpring
Thunder. No sooner than the revolt of the tribal
peasants in North Bengal shook the world did the
sparks of Naxalbari spreading the prairie fire of
revolutioninasmanyas600regionsinIndia.

ThenatureofthecommunistmovementinIndiahas
completely changed with the rise of the Naxalbari
revolutionary peasant struggle. The Indian
revolutionariesforthefirsttimeunderstoodthenature
of Indian revolution. Revolutionaries started
organizing the more oppressed sections of the rural
peasantry the landless and poor peasants, which in
Indiancontextmeantthedalitsandadivasisofthevast
backward countryside. The RDF works among the
broad sections of the masses spreading the
revolutionary message. Ever since the Naxalbari
rebellion, the poorest of the poor have come to the
centrestageofthepeoplesmovementinIndia.

1007] Initially,thesaidmovementwasdirectedagainstthe
Landlords and moneylenders. However, because of serious
ideological differenceswithin the movement soonresultedin splits
and countersplits, with the Peoples War, which later became the
Maoist Party, emerging as the most influential of all factions.
Althoughallfactionsbelievedinaprotractedarmedstruggleagainst
the State, they differed in their approaches, methods and
understanding of the complex sociopolitical formations and
conditions on ground. Thus, while the leader of each ideological
factionwasanameofreputeandsacrifice.

1008] Thereisanotherinterviewofaccusedno.6Saibaba
atPageno.119ofExh.267.BythattimehewasDeputySecretaryof
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
815 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

RDF. In the said interview at Page no.127 he had given the

development of Maoist Organisation under the different names.
Thesearereproducedasunder:

Thelargestgroupsin1972wasformedunder
the leadershipofChandraPullaReddy.Thisgroup
argued for peoples resistance first. There was
another groupundertheleadershipofTNReddy.
Thesearguedalsoforpeoplesresistancefirst.Both
argued for parliamentary participation. The third
majorgroupwasCPI(ML)Liberation,ledbyMishra.
These were centristonthese questions.Theywere
developed a peasants movement in Bihar and
continuedwitharmedstruggleforawhile.During
that time there was also a group led by
Ramanatham. He argued that India is not semi
feudal but capitalist. He formed the Communist
League of India (ML). The others are those that
believedinarmedstrugglefromthebeginning:CPI
(ML)PeoplesWarinthesouthofIndia,intheNorth,
theotherpartywastheMaoistcoordinationcenter
(MCC). ThethirdgroupwasCPI(ML)PartyUnity.
TheyalsostartedinBihar.Thesewereformedbythe
1980s.

There are two more groups formed by the 1980s:

ProvisionalCentralCommittee(ML),andCPI(ML)
SecondCC.BothoperatedinBengal.Thiswasthe
situationinthe1980s.

ThefirstpartythattransformeditsnaturewasCPI
(ML) Liberation. Initially they argued for armed
struggle. But stopped and took up peoples
resistanceandtheparliamentarypath.The1980sis
the decade when the parties worked among the
peopleandformedtheirownmassbaseindifferent
regions.

Therewasanattemptalreadyin1970tounitethe
various revolutionary groups into the United
RevolutionaryParty(URP).Butthreegroupsstayed
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
816 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

outside.URPitselfsplitintomanypartsby1972.

1009] Inthesaidinterviewaccusedno.6Saibabafurther
statedthatinthe1990stheunificationprocessstartedandtheMCC,
PeoplesWarandPartyUnityhaddiscussionsforpartyunityandinthe
unificationprocessPeoplesWarandPartyUnityunitedalongwith,
andformedCPI(ML)PeoplesWarin1998andtheprocesscontinued
until2004,thenCPI(Maoist)wasformed.

1010] Itismentionedinthesaiddocument(Pageno.41of
Exh.267)thatAIPRFin2005mergedwithothersimilarorganisations
to form Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) and from the
documentatArt.157titledasJointMeetingofAIPRFandSFPR,itis
clear that the said other similar organisation is SFPR. From the
document at Art.157 retrieved from the harddisc seized from the
house search of accused no.6 Saibaba, titled as Joint Meeting of
AIPRFandSFPR,itisclearfromResolutionno.1thatinthemeeting
unanimouslyresolvedtounifyAIPRFandSFPRintooneorganization
withanewnameRevolutionaryDemocraticFront(RDF).

1011] ThethenPrimeMinisterManmohanSinghdescribed
MaoistMovementasthegreatestinternalsecuritythreatandthis
fact is reflected in reply to question no.16of interviewof accused
no.6SaibabaatPageno.51ofExh.267inwhichhestatedthatthe
firstuntruthordistortion,ifonewouldliketocallitsoistheso
calledhijackingofthetrain.Eithertosensationaliseinordertoadd
some colour to drab news stories, or with the evil intention of
projectingtheNaxalitesasthebiggestthreattointernalsecurity.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
817 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1012] Having stated about the condition of the said

movementnowimpactofitsfunctioningonpeopleatlargeistobe
takenintoaccount.Whenonepersondiesitisatragedyandwhen
thousandsdiesitisastatistics. SituationofpeopleinGadchiroli
District today is that it has become routine part of their lives
observingtheincidentsofkillingofinnocentpersonsonthesuspicion
of police informer, police officers and damage and destruction of
publicpropertyatthehandsofnaxal.Asdiscussedinearlierpartof
thejudgmentthatCPI(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganisationlikeRDF
havebeenformedwithainfamoussloganNaxalbariEkHiRasta
whichhascomeintheDraftManifestoatArt.159retrievedfromthe
harddiscseizedfromthehousesearchofaccusedno.6Saibaba.The
ultimate goal of Maoist/Naxal of wresting powers of revolutionary
means in India. Even Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar, the Father of the
ConstitutionofIndiawasnotagainsttheideaofRevolutionbuthe
hademphasizedthatrevolutionshouldbebloodless.Byfollowingthe
path of Naxalbari Ek Hi Rasta the CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organisationRDFintendedtooverpowertheGovernmentmachineries
bymeansofviolentactivitiesandarmedrebellion.Itishightimefor
theseterroristorganisationstothinkchangingoftheofthepathof
naxalandtocomeinthemainstreamofdemocraticGovernmentas
saidpathwasalsonotprovedtobesuccessfulinothercountrieslike
Nepal,ChinaandRussia.ItisfortheCentralGovernmentandState
Governmenttotakestringentstepstoeradicatethenaxalactivities
andmovementalloverIndiabecausenowadaysitisnotonlylimited
tothetribalareabutitisspreadingintheurbanareainmajorcities.
ThethenPrimeMinisterofIndia,ManmohanSinghsaidthatNaxal
isthegreatestinternalsecuritythreattoIndia.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
818 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

1013] As observed earlier part of the judgment accused

nos.1to6areactivemembersofCPIMaoistbannedorganisationand
itsfrontalorganizationRDFwhichisformedwithinfamousslogan
NaxalbariEkHiRastaandtheprosecutionhasprovedthataccused
nos.1to6haveconspiredtogetherforcarryingoutillegalandviolent
activities of banned organization CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organizationRDFandfurtherfromthedocumentfiledalongwithlist
atExh.472atSerialno.3thecopyofFIRitisclearthatoffenceis
registered at Crime no.35/2016 dated 27.12.2016 registered at
Etapalli Police Station it is clear that conspiracy between accused
nos.1to6isstillcontinuedand since31.12.2008tilltodayseveral
innocent persons were killed by naxals on the suspicion of police
informersandseveralpoliceofficershavebeenkilledbynaxalsand
hugepublicpropertyhasbeeneitherdestroyed,damagedorburnt.
The Gadchiroli district has been formed in the year 1982 and the
StateGovernmenthasdeclaredthewholeGadchirolidistrictasnaxal
affectedareaon6August2002.AsperGovernmentrecord78%area
oftheGadchirolidistrictiscomprisedofforest.Itisagoodshelterfor
naxals. Because of the naxal movement and violent activities in
GadchirolidistrictthepositionofGadchirolidistricttodayissameas
it was in the year 1982 and for that the accused nos.1 to 6 and
members of banned organization CPI (Maoist) and its frontal
organizationRDFareresponsible.Hence,merelybecausetheaccused
no.6Saibabais90%disabledisnogroundtoshowhimleniencyand
thoughheisphysicallyhandicappedbutheismentallyfitandheisa
think tank and high profile leader of banned organization CPI
(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDFandbytheviolentactivities
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
819 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

of accused nos.1 to 6 and members of banned organization CPI

(Maoist)anditsfrontalorganizationRDF,thesituationofGadchiroli
district from 1982 till today is in paralyzed condition and no
industrialandotherdevelopmentsaretakingplacebecauseoffearof
naxal and their violent activities. Hence, in my opinion, the
imprisonment for life is also not a sufficient punishment to the
accusedbutthehandsoftheCourtareclosedwiththemandateof
Section18and20ofUAPAandinmyopinionitisafitcasetoaward
sentenceofimprisonmentoflifetoaccusedno.1MaheshTirki,no.2
Pandu Narote, no.3 Hem Mishra, no.4 Prashant Rahi and no.6
Saibabaforoffencepunishableu/s18r/w120BofIPCandu/s20
r/w120BofIPCandmaximumsentenceofimprisonmentforSection
13,38and39ofUAPAreadwithSection120BofIPC.

1014] Inrespectofaccusedno.5VijayTirkionlyasingle
incidentisprovedagainsthimthathewasfoundtakingaccusedno.4
Prashant Rhai from Devri Chichgad area to have meeting with
underground naxal Ramdar in forest area of Gadchiroli. While in
respectofaccusedno.1MaheshTirkiandno.2PanduNarotethereare
3to4incidentswheretheyactedasamediatortotakethemembers
ofbannedorganizationfromBallarsharailwaystationtoforestarea
ofGadchirolidistricttohavemeetingwithundergroundnaxals. In
myopinion,therearemitigatingcircumstancesinmatterofawarding
sentencetoaccusedno.5VijayTirkibutaccusedno.1MaheshTirki
and no.2 Pandu Narote deserve for deterrent punishment though
theirpositionisnotdifferentthanaccusedno.5VijayTirkiandinmy
opinion,followingsentencewouldmeettheendsofjusticeandIpass
followingorder.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
820 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

ORDER

1] Accused no.1 Mahesh Kariman Tirki, resident of

Murewada,Taluqa:Etapalli,DistrictGadchiroli,accusedno.2Pandu
Pora Narote, resident of Murewada, Taluqa : Etapalli, District
Gadchiroli, accused no.3 Hem Keshavdatta Mishra, resident of
Kunjbargal, Post : Nagarkhan, District : Almoda (Uttarkhand),
accused no.4 Prashant Rahi Narayan Sanglikar, resident of 87,
ChandrashekharNagar,Krushikesh,Deharadun,Uttarkhand,accused
no.5 Vijay Nan Tirki, resident of Beloda, Post P.V.92 Dharampur,
Taluqa : Pakhanjoor, District Kanker (C.G.) and accused no.6
Gokalkonda Naga Saibaba, resident of Warden House, Gwair Holl,
DelhiUniversityRoad,NewDelhihavebeenconvictedasperSection
235(2)oftheCriminalProcedureCodeforoffencespunishableunder
Section13,18,20,38,39oftheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,
1967readwithSection120BoftheIndianPenalCode.

2] Accusedno.1MaheshKarimanTirki,accusedno.2Pandu
Pora Narote, accused no.3 Hem Keshavdatta Mishra, accused no.4
PrashantRahiNarayanSanglikarandaccusedno.6GokalkondaNaga
SaibabaareconvictedfortheoffencepunishableunderSection13of
theUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967readwithSection120
B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer Rigorous
ImprisonmentforSevenYears each andtopayafineof Rs.1000/
(Rs.OneThousandonly)each andindefaulttosuffer R.I.forSix
monthseach.

3] Accusedno.5VijayNanTirkiis convictedfortheoffence
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
821 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

punishableunderSection13oftheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)
Act, 1967 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and
sentencedtosufferRigorousImprisonmentforFourYearsandtopay
afineofRs.1000/(Rs.OneThousandonly)andindefaulttosuffer
R.I.forSixmonths.

4] Accusedno.1MaheshKarimanTirki,accusedno.2Pandu
Pora Narote, accused no.3 Hem Keshavdatta Mishra, accused no.4
PrashantRahiNarayanSanglikarandaccusedno.6GokalkondaNaga
SaibabaareconvictedfortheoffencepunishableunderSection18of
theUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967readwithSection120
BoftheIndianPenalCodeandsentencedtosufferImprisonmentfor
Life each andtopayafineof Rs.1000/(Rs.OneThousandonly)
eachandindefaulttosufferR.I.forSixmonthseach.

5] Accusedno.5VijayNanTirkiis convictedfortheoffence
punishableunderSection18oftheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)
Act, 1967 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and
sentencedtosufferRigorousImprisonmentforTenYearsandtopaya
fineof Rs.1000/(Rs.OneThousandonly) andindefaulttosuffer
R.I.forSixmonths.

6] Accusedno.1MaheshKarimanTirki,accusedno.2Pandu
Pora Narote, accused no.3 Hem Keshavdatta Mishra, accused no.4
PrashantRahiNarayanSanglikarandaccusedno.6GokalkondaNaga
SaibabaareconvictedfortheoffencepunishableunderSection20of
theUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967readwithSection120
BoftheIndianPenalCodeandsentencedtosufferImprisonmentfor
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
822 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Life each andtopayafineof Rs.1000/(Rs.OneThousandonly)

eachandindefaulttosufferR.I.forSixmonthseach.

7] Accused no.5 Vijay Nan Tirki is convicted for the offence

punishableunderSection20oftheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)
Act, 1967 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and
sentencedtosufferRigorousImprisonmentforTenYearsandtopaya
fineof Rs.1000/(Rs.OneThousandonly) andindefaulttosuffer
R.I.forSixmonths.

8] Accusedno.1MaheshKarimanTirki,accusedno.2Pandu
Pora Narote, accused no.3 Hem Keshavdatta Mishra, accused no.4
PrashantRahiNarayanSanglikarandaccusedno.6GokalkondaNaga
SaibabaareconvictedfortheoffencepunishableunderSection38of
theUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967readwithSection120
B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer Rigorous
ImprisonmentforTenYearseachandtopayafineofRs.1000/(Rs.
OneThousandonly)eachandindefaulttosufferR.I.forSixmonths
each.

9] Accusedno.5VijayNanTirkiis convictedfortheoffence
punishableunderSection38oftheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)
Act, 1967 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and
sentencedtosufferRigorousImprisonmentforFiveYearsandtopaya
fineof Rs.1000/(Rs.OneThousandonly) and indefaulttosuffer
R.I.forSixmonths.

10] Accusedno.1MaheshKarimanTirki,accusedno.2Pandu
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
823 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Pora Narote, accused no.3 Hem Keshavdatta Mishra, accused no.4

PrashantRahiNarayanSanglikarandaccusedno.6GokalkondaNaga
SaibabaareconvictedfortheoffencepunishableunderSection39of
theUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)Act,1967readwithSection120
B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer Rigorous
ImprisonmentforTenYearseachandtopayafineofRs.1000/(Rs.
OneThousandonly)eachandindefaulttosufferR.I.forSixmonths
each.

11] Accusedno.5VijayNanTirkiis convictedfortheoffence

punishableunderSection39oftheUnlawfulActivities(Prevention)
Act, 1967 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and
sentencedtosufferRigorousImprisonmentforFiveYearsandtopaya
fineof Rs.1000/(Rs.OneThousandonly) andindefaulttosuffer
R.I.forSixmonths.

12] Allthesentencesshallrunconcurrently.

13] Theaccusedno.1MaheshKarimanTirkiwasinJailfrom
22.8.2013 to 18.11.2014. Hence, he is entitled to set off under
Section428oftheCriminalProcedureCode.

14] The accused no.2 Pandu Pora Narote was in Jail from
22.8.2013 to 18.11.2014. Hence, he is entitled to set off under
Section428oftheCriminalProcedureCode.

15] The accused no.3 Hem Keshavdatta Mishra was in Jail

from22.8.2013to7.9.2015. Hence,heisentitledtosetoffunder
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
824 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

Section428oftheCriminalProcedureCode.

16] Theaccusedno.4PrashantRahiNarayanSanglikarwasin
Jailfrom2.9.2013to30.8.2014.Hence,heisentitledtosetoffunder
Section428oftheCriminalProcedureCode.

17] The accused no.5 Vijay Nan Tirki was in Jail from
2.9.2013to18.7.2014.Hence,heisentitledtosetoffunderSection
428oftheCriminalProcedureCode.

18] Theaccused no.6GokalkondaNagaSaibaba wasinJail

from9.5.2014to2.7.2015andfrom25.12.2015to6.4.2016.Hence,
heisentitledtosetoffunderSection428oftheCriminalProcedure
Code.

19] Alltheaccusedtosurrendertheirbailbonds.

20] Police Station, Aheri is directed to trace absconding

accusedNarmadakkaandRamdarandtofileseparatechargesheet
againstthem.

21] The muddemal property in Muddemal Property

no.81/2015inSessionsCaseNo.13/20141]Onemobileofmicro
maxcompany,2]CashamountofRs.60/,onerailwayplatformticket
ofBallarshaRailwaystationdated28.5.2013,xeroxcopyofelection
identitycard,3]onemobileofSamsungCompany,4]Cashamountof
Rs.1480/, xerox copy of election identity card, Registration
Certificatebookofvehicleno.MH33/K9656,pancardandrailway
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
825 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

platformticketofBallarsharailwaystationdated28.5.2013,5]One
plastic bag containing passbook of State Bank of India, Birth
certificateofKarishmaNaroteandBirthcertificateofPanduNarote,
Caste certificate, School Leaving Certificate, Domicile Certificate,
xeroxcopyofrationcard,newspaperLokmatandumbrella,6]Cash
amount Rs.7700/, railway ticket of Delhi to Ballarsha dated
19.8.2013, ATM card of State Bank of India, Pan Card, election
identitycard,identitycardofJawaharlalNehruUniversity,identity
card,Yatricard7]OnecameraofKodakcompanyalongwithcharger,
8] One sack containing clothes, spect cover, white cap, newspaper
Sahara dated 19.8.2013, 9] Cash amount of Rs.8819/, Pancard,
Yatricard, driving license and 12 visitingcards 10] Newspaper
Dainik Bhaskar dated 1.9.2013, 11] One transparent plastic file
containingonerailwayticketofSamtaExpressfromNijamuddinto
Raipur having no.31737002 dated 31.8.2013, four empty packets,
twoxeroxcopiesofnewspaperDainikBhaskar,someplanepapers,
eightpagesofnaxalliteraturealongwithtypewrittenpapersofnaxal
undertrial Narayan alias Vijay alias Navin alias Prasad, 12] One
mobile of Intex company of silver colour, 13] cash amount of
Rs.5000/,14]OnenewspaperDainikBhaskardated1.9.2013and
four pieces of papers on which some phone numbers and the
information of some places was written, 15] letter of Justice K.
Balkrishnan,Chairperson,NationalHumanRightCommission,New
Delhi, dated 31 July 2012, 16] one printed letter of RDF against
operation green hunt dated 7 June 2012, 17] 15 printed pages
regarding People Hero Comrade Kishanji, 18] Newsbook by name
The Arrested, 19] People March dated 8 August 2007, 20]
MagazinesJanaPratirodhvolume39,41,42,21]Oneprintedbook
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
826 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

inTelgulanguage,22]Onecolourphotoofnaxallady,23]Onebook
of Lal Salam 24] One book showing Prasenbabu Maowadi Nahi
Hain, 25] One Telgu book having8pages,26]One letter oftwo
pagesofRDFdated21August2013,27]Onesketchofladyhaving
the no.7.7.07, 28] One mobile of Nokia company bearing IMEI
No.356320/05/85244429 containing Vodafone SIM card 29] One
mobile of Nokia company 359741/04/47915013 and IMEI
No.2359741/104/479151/3 ofduelSIM,30]OneMobile ofNokia
company having IMEI No.355931/04/460414/5, 31] SIM card of
Airtel no.89914904040857278526, 32] One SIM card of Vodafone
companyno.89911100182011289696,33]OnesealedenvelopeEx
25{Ex25,25/1}receivedfromCFSL,MumbaiofC.R.No.3017/13,
CY612/2014,34]OnesealedenvelopeExhibitNo.1toEx.24from
CFSL Mumbai in C.R.No.3017/13, CY612/2014, 35] One sealed
Envelope Exhibit No.1 from CFSL Mumbai in C.R.No.3017/13, CY
446/13,36]OnesealedenvelopeExhibitNo.Annexureharddiscs,
cy475/13 from CFSL, Mumbai in C.R.No.3017/13, 37] One sealed
envelope Exhibit No. Annexure hard discs, cy446/13 from CFSL,
MumbaiinC.R.No.3017/13,38]OnesealedenvelopeExhibitNo.25
{LAPTOP} from CFSL, Mumbai CY612/2014, C.R.No.3017/13 and
MuddemalPropertyno.14/2016inSessionsCaseNo.130/2015
1]Iphoneblackcolourmodelno.A1332EMC3808feeIDBCG.E2
308Ic579cE23808,2]cashamountofRs.320/and3]registration
certificateDL2CAK7878 bereturnedtoAheriPoliceStationand
theyshallfilethesameatthetimeoffilingsupplementarycharge
sheet against absconding accused persons as and when they are
arrested.
 WWW.LIVELAW.IN
827 S.C.No.13/2014 & 130/2015

22] The muddemal property electronic gadgets 16 GB

memorycardofSandiskCompanyatArt.137andCDs,DVDs,pen
drives, harddiscs etc. at Arts.1 to 41 be returned to Aheri Police
Stationinsealedconditionandtheyshallfilethesameatthetimeof
filingofsupplementarychargesheetagainsttheabscondingaccused
personsasandwhentheyarearrested.

23] Copy of the judgment be given to accused nos.1 to 6

separatelyfreeofcosts.

24] PronouncedinopenCourt.
Sd/
Dt/07.03.2017 (SuryakantS.Shinde)
SessionsJudge,Gadchiroli.

IaffirmthatthecontentsofthisPDFfileJudgmentare
samewordforwordasperoriginalJudgment.

NameofSteno:B.G.Rode,Stenographer(H.G.)
Courtname:SessionsCourt,Gadchiroli
DateofPDF:7.3.2017
JudgmentsignedbyPresidingOfficeron7.3.2017
Judgmentuploadedon7.3.2017.