Views
3 years ago

Crl.AppealNo.2295-2296of2010

Crl.AppealNo.2295-2296of2010

Crl.A.Nos.2295-2296 of 2010 -238-vazir and ACP Saheb of these officers showed mea person and asked me if I knew him. I did notknow that person at all. So I dared to say thatI did not know him.......So those officers made the officers ofCrime Branch, Ahmedabad sit in another room.They asked me to speak the truth. I repliedthat if I did so these officers would kill meand trouble my family too. At this DIG KRajendra answered me that they would not letany trouble fall upon my family, if I told thetruth. I was impressed with his words andstarted owning loudly. Due to his humanitarianapproach, I gained confidence and told him thatI was innocent and knew nothing aboutAkshardham. They answered me that they wouldnot let injustice happen to innocent as theyhad arrested the person involved in thisscandal. .......Later on 9-9-03 I was brought again toAhmedabad... I was brought to Crime Branch on14-9-03, Vanar Saheb called me...he was writingsomething on some papers...Then he gave thosepapers to me(which he was writing). He asked meto read those papers. In them, I was accusedof crime and falsely trapped in Akshardham caseby these officers. After reading, I pleaded andrequested Vanar saying that I was innocent andsuch allegations must not be charged onme....He asked me to read those papers in sameway and confess in front of live camera, asthey had written my role in those papers. ...Atabout 10.00 pm they compelled me to tell thefalse story in front of video camera....I usedto forgot and make mistakes in telling thewritten story. At this PI Vanar used to sign meand remind me....He also made the camera closeand abused me and reminded me the untrue story

Crl.A.Nos.2295-2296 of 2010 -239-in this way by beating and threatening me theymade me reveal an absolutely untrue story. .....I swear I have been wrongly trapped by Crimebranch Officers in Akshardham case. I amabsolutely innocent and do not know anythingabout Akshardham case...”(emphasis laid by this Court)(translation extracted from the Additionaldocuments submitted on behalf of State ofGujarat)This Court in the case of Navjot Sandhu (supra) whiledeciding whether the same rule of prudence forconfessions under the general law would apply forconfessions under the POTA as well, held as under:“46. …. The better view would be to follow thesame rule of prudence as is being followed inthe case of confessions under the general law.The confessional statement recorded by thepolice officer can be the basis of convictionof the maker, but it is desirable to look tocorroboration in a broad sense, when it isretracted. The non obstante provision advertedto by the learned Judges should not, in ourconsidered view, affect the operation of thegeneral rule of corroboration broadly.”

A Modern Prosecution Service - Department of Justice
legislation and prosecutions in uganda
Operation Marble
Putting on Mock Trials - Law-Related Education
HamMUN 2012 Study Guide_HRC
M887 - National Archives and Records Administration
Natural History Museum - The Open University
Presentation: European Gold Forum (Zurich) - Avocet Mining PLC
PRINCE2-Practitioner BrainDumps
Searchable Press Cuttings Part 2 (PDF Format, Size 17.2MB)
The life of the Prophet Muhammad - Ibn Kathir - volume 4 of 4
Download PDF - Wood Library-Museum of Anesthesiology
Close encounters - A report on police shoot-outs in Delhi, Oct., 2004
Code of Conduct 100x200 covers.ai - Frontex - Europa
CLEVELAND PRIMER. i r • • Paper I - To Parent Directory