Project Final Ipc Anant

8/3/2019 Project Final Ipc Anant

1/16

___________________________________________

PROJECT SUBMISSION

_________________________________

Indian Penal Code

_________________________________

Sohrabbudin Sheikh Fake

Encounter Case

___________________________________________

Submitted to: Submitted

by:

Deogaonkar Anant Kharadi

Sohrab


2/16

Assistant Professor of Law II Year,

Section: A

Indian Penal Code Registration

no: 10A058Gujarat National Law University

Index

1) Introduction...2

2) Criminal History of Sohrabbudin...........3

3) Killing of Sohrabbudin...7

4) Killing of Kauserbi.........8

5) Preliminary Investigation...8

6) Killing of Tulsi Prajapati9

7) CID Investigations in Prajapati Case................10

8) Investigations Files (Gita Jauhris Report).

..11

9) Investigations of CBI........12

10) Conclusion and impact of Sohrabbudin

case....14

11) Bibliography..15

2


3/16

Sohrabbudin Fake Encounter Case

Introduction:

The encounter of Sohrabbudin; who was charged forcriminal conspiracywhich

is defined under section 120A of the Indian Penal Code and also under arms and

ammunition act was made on November 26, 2005 when Sohrabbudin was

travelling with his wife Kauserbi and his partner Tulsi Prajapati, all three were

going in bus from Hyderabad to Sangli (Maharashtra) and than ATS of the

Gujarat Police stopped the bus and took them away. And than all three were

killed in the planned manner and all preparation. This case doesnt only include

high level of corruption in law enforcement agencies but also political interference

in the police tasks.. This case had resulted to the arrest of Amit Shah the former

minister of state for home.

Chargesheet was filed against DGP Vanzara, Rajkumar Pandayan and Abhay

Chudasama to kill or to eliminate Sohrabudin sheikh who was told to be a wanted

gangster who had many charges against him in Gujarat, Rajasthan, Madhya

Pradesh and Maharashtra.

Many officers were named in this case DGP Vanzara, Abhay Chudasma, Ashish

Pandya, Rajendra Jirawala and many others all these were liable equally for the

killing of Sohrabbudin, his wife Kauserbi and Tulsiram Prajapati because theyperformed their part effectively and also destroyed evidence effectively like the

elimination of Praja3pati and Sohrabbudin wife.

This case highlights the atrocities carried out by the law enforcement agencies on

common man and the political interference and influence in the law enforcement

agencies.

3


4/16

Through this research paper I would be highlighting the various charges levied on

Sohrabbudin and to what extent they were true. I would also highlight the judicial

proceedings of this highly controversial case and the investigation that was

carried out. And the various causes behind this fake encounter and the people

involved.

Also this case highlightens such other Fake encounter cases like Ravindra Pal

Singh v. Santosh Kumar Jaiswal & Ors1.also the recent Dara Singh case brings

the same issue in light

CRIMINAL HISTORY OF SOHRABBUDIN:

Abdul Latif: Abdul Latif was a gangster of Gujarat in late 1980s. He was

involved in bootlegging industry. Later when he expanded his business he soon

became the business manager of Dawood Ibrahim in the Gujarat state and soon

got himself involved in activities ranging from organized crime to the terrorism.

Latifs name was also extended to his involvement in the Mumbai blast in 1993,

the RDX explosive along with Ak-47 and hand grenades for this blast was landed

on the Gujarat coast which was used in the 1993 Mumbai Blast.

Sohrabbudin: The First time Sohrabbudin came in picture was in 1995 when the

cops got information about a consignment of arms in Madhya Paradesh. Gujarat

Police recovered AK-47 rifles and more than 40 grenades, these arms were kept

in the plastic bag before hiding them in the well. Many of the Latifs group

members were under watch by the cops and one of them was his driver whose

name is Sohrabbudin Sheikh. He took a daring move and showed loyalty towards

Latif by hiding arms and grenades in his native village in well in Madhya Pradesh.

This was the first time when his name was first figured in the Gujarat polices

records in 1995. Sohrabbudin was considered to be very smart and had sharp

1Ravindra Pal Singh v. Santosh Kumar Jaiswal, (2011) 4 SCC 746

4
http://www.supremecourtcases.com/index-practicallawyer.php?option=com_login&task=view&Itemid=51&id=21373http://www.supremecourtcases.com/index-practicallawyer.php?option=com_login&task=view&Itemid=51&id=21373


5/16


intellect.. He was an established criminal and many offences were charged

against him in Madhya Pradesh.

Sohrabbudin Sheikh belongs to the Jharnia village of Madhya Pradesh. Sharif

Khan who was aide and confidante of Latif took Sohrabbudin to Ahmedabad,

where he started working for Latifs gang. Sohrab managed to stay out of the

police radar till 1995. In 1995 he was first arrested by the Gujarat Police by ATS

sub-inspector Tarun Barot from the scrap market in Danilimda, ahmedabad in the

Jharnia arms case in which he did hide arms and grenades in his agricultural

field in Madhya Pradesh before Mumbai blasts. He was sent to sabarmati jail for

5 years as punishment, during his term in jail Latif too was in jail while their

college Sharif Khan managed to escape to Pakistan. During this time he met

Abhay Chudasma who was deputy superintendent of police of ATS Gujarat. All

these contacts results into his progress in his business when he was released

from jail in 2000, by that time Latif was shot dead by ATS, Gujarat in 1996. After

Latifs death Sohrab decided to make his own gang to continue his activities.

Sohrabuddin was involved in nearly two dozen serious criminal offences in

states of Gujarat, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra. He maintained

transnational links with anti-India forces from the early 90s onwards, until his

death in 2005. Working with mafia dons like Dawood Ibrahim and Abdul Latif, he

procured weapons and explosives from Pakistan and supplied them to various

terrorist and anti-national groups (had it not been for his activity, at least some

terrorist acts could have been averted). Sohrabuddin was solidly entrenched in

the criminal world for a decade-and-a-half. Around the time he was killed, the

Rajasthan government had announced a reward on his head. In 1999, he had

been detained under the National Security Act by the Madhya Pradesh

government.

In a 1994 case investigated by the Ahmedabad crime branch, he was co-accused

along with Dawood Ibrahim and convicted for five years, for waging war against

the Government of India, planning an attack on the Jagannath Rath Yatra in

Orissa, and other offences under the IPC, Arms Act, etc. During the investigation,

5


6/16

24 AK-56 rifles, 27 hand grenades, 5250 cartridges, 81 magazines and more

were seized from his family home in Madhya Pradesh.

In 2004, a fourth crime was registered against him by Chandgad police station of

Kolhapur district in Maharashtra undersections 302, 120 (b), and 25 (1) (3) of

theArms Act, for the killing of Gopal Tukaram Badivadekar. As fear of him often

silenced people from reporting his whereabouts, let alone deposing against him,

the Rajasthan government had to announce a reward on his head after he killed

Hamid Lata in broad daylight in the heart of Udaipur, on December 31, 2004.

In all of these four states there were many cases registered against him. He was

charged for criminal conspiracy which is defined under section 120A of theIndian Penal Code, he was also charged for many of the offences under Indian

Penal Code from all over the places across the country like:

120 A: Criminal Conspiracy

120 B: Punishment for Criminal Conspiracy

121: Waging war against Government of India

122: Collecting arms etc, with intention of waging war against Government of

India

123: Concealing with intent to facilitate design to wage war

467: Forgery of valuable security, will etc

468: Forgery for purpose of cheating

471: Using as genuine a forged document

307: Attempt to murder

110: Extortion

111: Punishment for extortion

302: Punishment for murder

379: Punishment for theft

399: Making preparation for committing dacoity

452: House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint

341: Punishment for wrongful restraint

6


7/16


352: Punishment for assault or criminal force otherwise than on grave

provocation

353: Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty

147: Punishment for rioting

148: Rioting, armed with deadly weapon.

These all are the provisions of the IPC for which Sohrabbudin was charged

across the country. He was also charged for Arms & Explosives Act and Customs

Act.

Sohrabbudin extortion network also expanded in Rajasthan especially around

Udaipur. He later called his wife Kauserbi (her original name was Shehnabi) to

the Udaipur, there they both lived together till they were killed by the police in

2005. Sohrab became rival with another gangster Hamid Lala who was also

involved in the extortion racket and there was also dispute between Sohrabbudin

and Hamid Lala on the matter of protection money. This dispute between them

result into the shootout between the both gangs in broad daylight near Hathipol

crossroads in Udaipur on December 2004 and it resulted in the death of the

Hamid Lala. The death of Hamid Lala by Sohrabbudin resulted into the fear in the

Marble traders of Rajasthan and all of them started to give protection money to

Sohrabbudin.

Some of the Sohrabbudin gang members were arrested for the Hamid Lalas

murder and were sent behind the bars. Due to this increasing of extortion

activities of Sohrabbudin and his gang members, it resulted into anger and the

feeling of revenge against Sohrabbudin in Marble traders of Rajasthan.

According to the some reports Marble traders met top cops and politicians of

Rajasthan to end the extortion racket of Sohrabbudin.

Encounter of Sohrabbudin Sheikh:

According to the Azam Khan a key witness in the Sohrabbudin Sheikh fake

encounter case; claims that 10 crores rupees were given to the ministers to kill

Sohrabbudin. Rajasthan BJP leaders Om Mathur and Gulabchand Kataria were

7


8/16

lead suspected as link between the marble traders and the Amit Shah. The

policemen convinced Tulsi Prajapati by giving him money to set the stage for the

killing of Sohrabbudin. Reports say that Amit Shah ordered police officers DGP

Vanzara, Rajkumar Pandyan and Abhay Chudasama to eliminate Sohrabuddin

Sheikh. According to the interim report of CID led by Geeta Johri, Inspector

General of Police; the officials of Gujarat, Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh were

involved in the killing of Sohrabbudin. Tulsi Prajapati agreed to help police in lieu

of an hefty amount .Tulsiram was sconsidered to be Sohrabbudins right hand.

Tulsiram informed the police officials that Sohrabbudins wife was having a

medical problem and for the treatment they are planning to go to doctor in Sangli,

it was decided that they will first lead to Hyderabad and then to Sangli; Tulsiram

also accompanied them. Tulsiram had given information about their bus no. in

which they were going to travel and he had also given their seat numbers.

On 21st November 2005 Sohrabbudin along with his wife and Tulsiram left for

Indore in a Maruti van and they were on their way to Hyderabad after which they

were going to catch bus for Sangli. On 22nd November when they were travelling

in bus from Hyderabad to Sangli, Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh police stopped the

bus between a highway connecting Hyderabad and Sangli. Then the police

officials asked Sohrabbudin and Tulsiram to come out of the bus and to

surrender and they both cooperate with the orders of the police officials but

Sohrabbudins wife Kauserbi was not letting his husband to go along with the

police, than the police officials after the discussion between them took Kauserbi

along with them.

On November 23 the trio was brought to Ahmedabad and Tulsiram was allowed

to go as he was the informer of Vanzara. Sohrabbudin and his wife were kept at

Disha farm house in the outskirts of Ahmedabad. There they both were confined

for 1-2 days and then Sohrabbudin was taken away. Anti-Terrorism Squad

officers from Gujarat, including DG Vanzara and RK Pandayan, and Rajasthan

Superintendent of Police MN Dinesh were present at a place between

Ahmedabad circle and Vishala circle toll points. There these officers had planned

to kill Sohrabbudin by presenting his killing as encounter. Constable Ajay Parmar

8


9/16


was asked to bring hero-honda from the backyard of an ATS office. Sub-

inspector of Police of Rajasthan rode the Honda for short distance and then

jumped of it. Then Sohrabbudin was taken out of the car and was thrown on the

road and all the four police officials fired 8 rounds from there service pistols. Then

Vanzara asked Ajay Parmar to take Sohrabbudin to civil hospital. This led to the

death of Sohrabbudin

Kauserbi:

On 26th November 2005 after taking Sohrabbudin, Kauserbi was removed from

the farmhouse on the morning of November 26 on the request of the owner. She

was transferred to Arham farmhouse near Koba-Adlaj Road near Gandhinagar, it

belongs to Rajendra Jirawala whose brother was a BJP politician. Kauserbi was

last seen in white maruti car with plainclothes policeman of Gujarat. The police

official thought that she may create hurdles for them in future and so after 2 days

of killing of Sohrabbudin on 28th November 2005 even she was killed. It may also

be possible that she might be raped by the Police Officials. There is no evidence

or witness regarding this issue till now. Her body was burnt near Sabarmati and

her ashes were thrown in the Narmada river from Golden bridge near Bharuch.

The report of CID is also silent on her killing because till now there are not any

concrete evidence or witness regarding this issue.

Preliminary Investigations:

Sohrabbudins brother Rubabbudin Sheikh on 28th November 2005 filed an

application with CID Gujarat seeking to find his sister-in-law who was missing

since few days. But this application of Sohrabbudins brother didnt show any

results into. The Encounter of these two people didnt came into the eye of

anyone until the media report by Prashant Dayal. On November 2006 in the

leading Gujarati Newspaper Dainik Bhaskar he disclosed the story of fake

9


10/16

encounter of the Gujarat Police. This news spread like fume in the air and it

created many controversies of involving many high officials of that time.

Subsequently in 2006 Sohrabbudins brother Rubabbudin filed a writ petition in

the Supreme Court claiming that encounter killing of his brother Sohrabbudin was

fake and to find his sister-in-law Kauserbi. After the filing of petition of

Rubabbudin and the media reports made the master minds (officials) to think to

eliminate Tulsiram Prajapati who was the one and alone eye witness in the

Sohrabbudin encounter case. Amit Shah was the one who ordered the officials to

Vipul Aggrawal and DG Vanzara to kill Prajapati otherwise he will spread the

beans of truth all around. It is also said that Prajapati was getting threats to be

killed by the police officials that if he say anything about the death of

Sohrabbudin to anybody than they will kill him, due to this reason only he wrote

letters to the Rajasthan Government to protect him because he was feeling that

he was going to be killed by the Gujarat Police and he also had written letter to

his brother to file writ petition in the Rajasthan High Court because he was having

threat to his life by police officials only. And on 28th December 2006 Prajapati was

killed in another encounter by police officials in Banaskathan district of Gujarat.

.

CID Investigations in Prajapati Case:

The CID officer R.K Patel said that Tulsiram was killed on 28 th December 2006

when he was to be interrogated by IG, CID Geetha Johri for the Sohrabbudin

Sheikh fake encounter case. The police FIR which says that Tulsiram was killed

in encounter when he tried to escape from police custody when he was being

taken to Rajasthan by train he threw chilly powder at policem and tried to escape

but was shot dead during this act. But Railway police says that no chilly powder

was thrown at the policemen. And the police also claimed of firing on police party

by Prajapati, but the gun which was spotted from the deceased Prajapati, when it

was sent to forensic lab for test it resulted that it was jammed and was unable

to shoot. This story by the police clearly shows that it was just fake stories and

this is one of their drawback in their planning. According to police Prajapati tried

10


11/16


to escape from police custody from train but in fact he was spotted from the

Amblipar village on the Ambaji-Mount Abu Road by a police team (SOG) leading

Ashish Pandya. Prajapati written letter to his brother as well as to the State Govt.

of Rajasthan from jail. CID have arrested 5 policemen involved in the killing of

Prajapati and according to the investigations till now it stated that there were 12

accused in the killing of Prajapati among which 5 were already been arrested

which includes Ashish Pandya and three constables and Vipul Aggrawal and the

rest 5 are absconding till date and among them 4 are rajasthan officials who

accompanied Prajapati in car from Kalupur to Ambaji. CID is now questioning the

other IPS officers in order to get the clear and confirm picture about the killing of

Tulsiram Prajapati.

Investigations Files (Gita Jauhris Report):

Supreme Court of India in March 2007 after hearing many allegations by

Rubabbudin and by various human rights organizations, the Supreme Court

ordered CID Gujarat to start investigations into the case and this case was given

into the hands of IGP Geeta Johri. The investigations of CID led to the result that

the encounter killing of Sohrabbudin was fake and it was also revealed that hiswife Kauserbi was also killed by the police. The Gujarat Government on March

23, 2007 accepted before Supreme Court to the killing of Sohrabbudin Sheikh in

encounter and later in April accepted the killing of Kauserbi by the Gujarat Police.

At that time police said that Sohrabbudin was terrorist who belongs to the group

of Lashkar-e-taiba and was here in Gujarat to kill Gujarats Chief Minister

Narendra Modi. The Supreme Court however ordered and instructed CID to

investigate independently and thoroughly. Geeta Johri who was leading the

investigation in this case had disclosed many names of the police officers who

were involoved in the killing of Sohrabbudin Sheikh. She also came up with the

names of many political leaders with concrete evidence. She and DIG Rajnish

Rai arrested DIG DG Vanzara of Banaskantha District and Rajkumar Pandian

Superintendent of Police and MN Dinesh of Rajasthan Police was arrested.

11


12/16

Geeta Johri in her two part investigations had disclosed many things and also

given evidence to the Supreme Court regarding the involvement of State

Government in the form of Mr. Amit Shah who was Minister of State for Home.

Geeta Johri in her investigations clearly stated the involvement of the State

Government and many IPS officials in this encounter killing. In her part B report

she claims that Mr. Shah and many other officials of State were disturbing the

investigations of the CID and she also stated in her report to the Supreme Court

that Mr. Amit Shah was making pressure on the CID and is interrogating in its

investigations. Mr. Shah also directed Additional Director General of Police R.C

Raigar to give him the list of all the witnesses who are going to be questioned in

this investigation, this act of Mr. Shah is clearly out of his official duty and is

illegal. Due to acts of Mr. Shah; Geeta Johri was ordered to suspend the enquiry

and enquiry papers were taken from her. And she was also removed from the

investigations in this matter. But later she was restored by her seat in the

investigations on the order of Supreme Court. Geeta Johri in her reports

suggested for transferring the case to CBI, so the Supreme Court angered by

Gujarats police careless investigations transferred the Investigations into the

hand of Central Bureau of Investigation on January 13, 2010.

CBIs investigation:

CBI investigation in this case was headed by DIG P Kandaswamy and SP

Amitabh Thakur. These two officers are appointed by the court to investigate in

this matter and to come up with the transparent result.

CBI files fresh FIR in Sohrabbudin case and started its investigations and with

the help of evidences and witnesses CBI arrested Abhay Chudasma and filed

Chargesheet against Amit Shah, Minister of State for Home, Gujarat.

Abhay Chudasma: CBI on 28th April 2010 arrested Indian police Official Abhay

Chudasma. According to the CBI he played a very important role in the killing of

Sohrabbudin, .He was the prime conspirator in his abduction and murder. Azam

Khan who is one of the witness of the CBI said that Sohrabbudin used to take

12


13/16


extortion money on behalf Abhay Chudasma from Marble traders of Rajasthan

and Chudasma used to give 25% of money to Sohrabbudin and keep remaining

75% money with himself. He is charged forAbduction defined under section

3622 of the Indian Penal Code and forMurderof Sohrabbudin underSection3003

and 3024 of Indian Penal Code and also forextortion defined in section 3835of

the IPC.

Amit Shah: On 24th July 2010 CBI filed first Charge sheet in this case against

Amit Shah. This charge sheet disclosed the fact that Amit Shah ordered DGP

Vanzara, Rajkumar Pandyan and Abhay Chudasama to eliminate Sohrabuddin

Sheikh. It was also said by the CBI witness that Police got 10 crore rupees for

killing of Sohrabbudin Sheikh by R.K Patni the trader of R.K Marble. The

chargesheet also revealed Amit Shah liable murder (Sec. 300,302), Extortion

(Sec. 383), and destruction of evidence and making false documents. The

charge sheet accuses him of extorting Rs 5 crore from a group of seven Gujarati

businessmen who had used gangster Sohrabuddin in order to recover their

2Section 362 Whoever by force compels, or by any deceitful means induces, any person to go from any

place, is said to abduct thatperson.3Section 300 Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the

death is caused is done

with the intention of causing death, or-

Secondly- If it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to

cause the death

of the person to whom the harm is caused, or-Thirdly- If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended

to be inflicted is

sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, or-

Fourthly,- If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all

probability, cause

death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse forincurring the risk of

causing death or such injury as aforesaid.4Section 302 Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or 104[imprisonment for life], and

shall also be liable to fine.5Section 383 Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to any other,

and thereby dishonestly induces

the person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property or valuable security, or anything signed or

sealed which

may be converted into a valuable security, commits "extortion"

13


14/16

money from debtors. On 26th July 2010 after resigning as a minister Amit Shah

surrendered before CBI and he was sent to judicial custody till August 7, 2010.

Other Accused: Rajendra Jirawala who was the owner of the Arham farm was

arrested where Sohrabbudin and his wife Kauserbi were locked after they were

arrested by policemen during their way to Sangli. He was arrested on 27 th July

and was questioned by CBI. Sohrabbudin and his wife on November 25, 2005

were confined there and on next day after the killing of Sohra`bbudin his wife was

locked there for 2 days and than she was also killed. Rajendra was charged with

criminal conspiracy (Sec: 120A6, 120B7), wrongful confinement (Sec:

3408,3419) and destruction of evidence.

Conclusion and impact of Sohrabbudin case:

Irrespective of who Sohrabuddin was or what he did, the use of unfathomable

might against him is hard to defend is the public view of many. There is a higher

underlying principle for such actions in undeniable circumstances, as the law of

the land has over and over again found itself unaided in dealing with individuals

bent on bleeding the country. Their disagreement, that the rule of law is a

means to an end and not an end in itself, repeatedly finds support in the

jurisprudential principles ofsalus populi est suprema lex (the peoples welfare

is the supreme law) and salus res publica est suprema lex (the safety of the

6Section120AWhen two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done,-

(1) an illegal act, or

(2) an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy:Provided that no agreement except an agreement to commit an offence shall amount to a criminal

conspiracy unless some act besides the agreement is done by one or more parties to such agreement in

pursuance thereof.7Section 120B(1) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with death,

51[imprisonment for life] or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, shall, where no

express provision is made in this Code for the punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in the samemanner as if he had abetted such offence.

(2) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy other than a criminal conspiracy to commit an offencepunishable as aforesaid shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding

six months, or with fine or with both.8 Whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceedings

beyond certain circumscribing limits, is said "wrongfully to confine" that person.9 Whoever wrongfully restrains any person shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which

may extend to one

month, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.

14


15/16


nation is supreme law). Even the Supreme Court of India, in the case of D.K.

Basu vs. State of West Bengal10 accepted the validity of these two morality and

characterized them as not only significant and applicable, but lying at the heart

of the set of guidelines that welfare of an individual must succumb to that of the

community. The validity of the principles of salus populi est suprema lex and

salus res publica est suprema lex could have been part of an free-thinking

national discussion, and what could be the governing instrumentalities,

empowerments, legal checks and rigorous processes if these principles were to

be invoked. Insincere ignorance is the worst type of hypocrisy.

But there is another essential question that needs to be addressed. While

pursuing the Sohrabuddin case, was the government in truth solemn aboutstopping the peril of fake encounters, or was it pursuing a diverse plan?

Encounters have been taking place all over the country under all regimes, at

times degenerating into what are called fake encounters. Between 2000 and

2007 there have been 712 cases of police encounters in the country with UP

topping the list at 324, and Gujarat figuring almost at the bottom with 17.

In some of the cases there was not much on documentation, even to establish

the criminal past of those killed. Settling political scores through security and

analytical agencies like the CBI is not only dreadful politics, but also caustic for

the nations safety. To suggest the impression (explicitly or implicitly) that

Sohrabuddin was targeted for belonging to a meticulous community, thereby

creating a sense of anxiety in a section of society, is detrimental to national

welfare. William Blake rightly said that a truth that is pursued with bad intent

beats all the lies you can invent.

The other off-putting impact of the Sohrabuddin case is the notion it is creating

that all encounters in which police and security forces are involved, are fake.

Society needs to be reassured that the majority of encounters are genuine and

mostly in response to murderous attacks on security personnel. The actuality

10D.K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal1997 (1) SCC 416

15


16/16

that, on average, over 1,200 policemen get killed every year grappling with

terrorists, insurgents, underworld mafia and other anti-social elements, bears

ample proof to this fact. Playing up a few aberrations and blowing them out of

proportion and presenting them as the only truth is not in the national interest.

Bibliography

Book Referred:

1) Professor S.N Mishra,Indian Penal Code, 15th Edition, Central Law Publishers,

Universal Book Traders.

Websites Referred:

1) www.hindustantimes.com

2) www.dnaindia.com

3) www.timesofindia.com

4) www.indianexpress.com

5) http://News.oneindia.in

6) http://realityviews.blogspot.com

7) http://nsm.org.in

8) www.thehindu.com

9) www.gujaratglobal.com

10) www.zeenews.com

11) http://www.supremecourtcases.com

16
http://www.hindustantimes.com/http://www.dnaindia.com/http://www.timesofindia.com/http://www.indianexpress.com/http://news.oneindia.in/http://realityviews.blogspot.com/http://nsm.org.in/http://www.thehindu.com/http://www.gujaratglobal.com/http://www.zeenews.com/http://www.hindustantimes.com/http://www.dnaindia.com/http://www.timesofindia.com/http://www.indianexpress.com/http://news.oneindia.in/http://realityviews.blogspot.com/http://nsm.org.in/http://www.thehindu.com/http://www.gujaratglobal.com/http://www.zeenews.com/

Documents

Project Final Ipc Anant