Muzaffarnagar : Acquitting a Muzaffarnagar man on Thursday after “a decade of wait” in a case under NDPS Act, the court of additional sessions judge (fast track-No 3), Ravi Kumar Diwakar, observed that “circling the courts for 10 years is in itself a punishment and the mental trauma caused by such a delay can hardly be imagined”.
Judge Diwakar, who has been in news recently for delivering a series of capital punishment verdicts, also referred to a popular dialogue from movie ‘Damini’ about courts passing “date after date, instead of justice”. Ashok Bharati, resident of Muzaffarnagar’s Patel Nagar area, was arrested on Oct 21, 2015, near Bharatia Colony and 150 gms of ‘charas’ was “recovered from his kurta’s right pocket”, according to the prosecution. The court further found the police statements and recovery memo “to be stereotyped”. The case was registered in 2015, the charge-sheet was filed in 2016, while Bharati was acquitted — 10 years later — after the prosecution “failed to prove the charges against him beyond reasonable doubt”.
The sample seal was also not produced in court, while gaps were found in communication of information to senior officers.
He also mentioned the recent recall of 97 ‘part-heard’ cases by a district judge (now retired) from his court. The judge further observed that a part-heard case cannot be recalled once its trial or hearing has commenced, and he referred to CrPC 412 and BNSS section 452, which require reasons to be recorded for such orders. It should be noted that a total of 97 pending files involving heinous offences were recalled from the court of judge Diwakar to the court of district and sessions judge on Aug 19, days after it emerged that the former had awarded death sentences to convicts in murder cases over four months.
He noted that the recall orders contained no reasons and were therefore not “speaking orders”, stressing that the judicial and administrative powers must remain within the limits prescribed by law. Notably, a part-heard case is a legal proceeding that may have started in court, but the arguments, evidence or trial are yet to be finished. During the trial in Muzaffarnagar, the court found several shortcomings in the prosecution case, including the absence of independent witnesses despite the alleged recovery taking place in a public area, discrepancies in evidence and non-compliance with mandatory provisions of NDPS (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances) Act.