New Delhi, April 18 A Delhi court has convicted two Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) officials for offences of assault, mischief and criminal trespass in connection with a controversial search and arrest operation conducted at the residence of a senior Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer in 2000, holding that the action was carried out in a “malafide manner” to frustrate a tribunal order.
Judicial Magistrate First Class Shashank Nandan Bhatt of the Tis Hazari Courts convicted V.K. Pandey, then Inspector, and Ramneesh, then Deputy Superintendent of Police, under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 427 (mischief), 448 (criminal trespass), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code.
The case arose from a complaint filed by Ashok Kumar Aggarwal, a 1985-batch IRS officer, who alleged that the accused officials forcibly entered his Paschim Vihar residence in the early hours of October 19, 2000, assaulted him, and carried out an illegal search as part of a vendetta linked to investigations he was handling.
In its detailed judgment delivered on Saturday, the court held that the search and arrest proceedings were not a bona fide exercise of official power but were driven by ulterior motives.
“The entire search and arrest proceedings dated 19.10.2000 were conducted by the accused persons in a malafide manner by exceeding the powers vested upon them by law,” the court observed.
Rejecting the defence that the officials were protected under Section 197 CrPC for acts done in discharge of official duty, the court held that the conduct in question had “no reasonable nexus with official duty” and instead amounted to abuse of power.
The court found inconsistencies in the defence version and relied on the prosecution’s account that the main door was broken without sufficient justification.
“The actions of the accused persons in breaking open the main door… without any justified reason constitute the commission of mischief,” the court observed, adding that the subsequent entry amounted to criminal trespass.
On the allegation of assault, the court relied on the complainant’s testimony, corroborating witness accounts, and medical evidence, including an MLC indicating an injury on the complainant’s forearm.
“There is absolutely no explanation for the injury… which points towards custodial violence at the time of effecting the arrest,” the court observed.
The judge also rejected arguments regarding the delay in filing the complaint and the failure to examine certain witnesses, holding that neither undermined the prosecution's case.
The accused had denied the allegations, claiming that the search was necessitated as the complainant was not cooperating and that only minimal force was used. They further argued that all procedures were duly followed.
However, the court found the defence version unreliable, citing contradictions between witness testimonies and official records, including the search list.
Significantly, the court noted that the timing of the arrest — a day after a deadline to respond to directions issued by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) — indicated a deliberate attempt to derail the review of the complainant’s suspension.
“All these factors lead to a necessary inference that the actions… were malafide and done with the object of nullifying the order dated 28.09.2000,” the court said.
Concluding that the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, the court held that the accused had abused their authority.
“The actions of the accused persons were deliberate attempts aimed at denying the complainant the fruits of the order passed by CAT… by exercising their powers in a malafide manner,” it said.
The court accordingly convicted both officials and directed that a copy of the judgment be supplied to them free of cost.
The matter will now proceed to the sentencing stage.
--IANS
pds/dan
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor