Holding

The Court directed the CBI to investigate the offences, stayed the trial until 16 March 1992, and rejected the transfer of the case.

Summary

Three miscreants broke into a Christian missionary school in Uttar Pradesh on the night of July 12/13, 1990, assaulting and raping two nuns and looting cash and jewellery. The police arrested four persons, recovered some watches, and filed a charge‑sheet, but the victims refused to identify the accused in the magistrate's identification parade, alleging that the real culprits were three, not four. Three prominent citizens filed a public‑interest writ petition under Article 32 seeking a CBI investigation and transfer of the criminal trial to Delhi. The Supreme Court held that, although the police investigation was complete, the circumstances warranted a fresh investigation by the CBI to ensure justice and public confidence. It directed the CBI to take over the investigation within three months, ordered the senior superintendent and the station house officer to assist, and stayed the trial before the IXth Additional Sessions Judge, Muradabad, until March 16, 1992. The Court rejected the petition to transfer the case to another court and disposed of the writ petitions with these directions.

Issues considered

Whether the Supreme Court may order a CBI investigation in a case already investigated by the police and charge‑sheet filed.
Whether the criminal trial should be transferred to another Sessions Court.
Whether the trial proceedings should be stayed pending the CBI investigation.

Subjects

Public Interest LitigationArticle 32CBI investigationrapeassaultidentification paradestay of proceedingstransfer of case

Judgment

GUDALURE M. J. CHERIAN AND ORS. A
v.
UNI0N OF INDIA AND ORS.

DECEMBER 9, 1991

[KULDIP SINGH AND M. FATHIMA BEEVI, JJ.] B

Constitution of India, 1950 ·: ...

Art. 32-Public Interest Litigation-Assault and rape on nuns-Allega-
tion that police arresting wrong persons and not real culprits-'-1nvestigation
by CBJ-Directions given. C
· · On the night between July 12/13, 1990 three miscreants entered the
residentia.1 quarters of· a school run by a Christian Missionary, and
assaulted the maid servant and some sisters; The miscreants also commit-
ted rape on two of the sisters and had beaten the sisters and threatened to
kill them. They also ransacked the house and ·after breaking open· the D
almirah looted Rs. 1,11,000/- and snatched away the wrist watches and
also the earrings of the maid servant.

· Police arrested four persons and recovered some wrist watches from
them. Charge-sheet was filed. According to the police the sisters and the E
maid-servant recognised the accused and the wrist watches.

However, the sisters and the maid servant did not come forward to
identify the accused and the stolen property, before the Magistrate. They
stated that the four persons arrested were not the culprits and that there
were 3 and not 4 culprits involved in the incident. The trial was pending F
in the SeSsions Court.

Meanwhile 3 prominent Citizens filed in public interest the present
Writ Petitions before this Court contending that the investigation of the
case be entrusted to the CBI and for transfer of the case to another Court.
G
Disposing of the Writ Petitions, this Court,

HELD : 1. The investigation having been completed by the police
and charge-sheet submitted to the Court, it is not for this Court, ordinar-
ily, to re-open the investigation specially by entrusting the same to a
specialised agency like CBI. Oflate the demand for CBI investigation even H

251
252 SUPREME c;OURT REPORTS [1991)" SUPP. 3 S. C.R.

A in police cases is on the increase. Nevertheless in a given situation, to do
justice between ,the parties and to instil confidence in the public mind it
may become necessary to ask the CBI to investigate a crime. It only shows
the efficiency and the independence of the agency. [254-H; 255·A]

2. The Nuns who are victims of the tragedy are not coming forward
B to identify the culprits in an identification parade before the Magistrate.
Allegedly the four persons who have been set up as accused by the police
are not the real culprits and the police is asking the Sisters to accept the
four arrested persons as· culprits. In the face of these averments and
keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, ends of justice
would be met by directing the CBI to hold further investigation in respect
C of the said offences. The CBI shall take up the investigation of the case
immediately. The Senior Superintendent Police and the Station House
Officer concerned shall assist the CBI in conducting tht! investigation. The
State of Uttar Pradesh through its Chief Secretary and the Home Secre-
tary is further directed to provide all assistance to the CBI in this respect.
The CBI shall complete the investigation within three months and submit
D its report in accordance with Jaw. [255 B, C & E]

3. The prayer for transfer of the criminal case is rejected. The
criminal proceedings before the Sessions Court shall remain st.ayed till
March 16, 1992. [255-D J
E ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Crl.)No. 1753-55of1990.

Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

Ms. Lily Thomas for the Petitioners.
F
A.S. Pundir, Vijay Hansaria, Sunil Jain, Shivi Sharma; N.N. Sharma,
Mrs. Anil Katiyar and Ms. A. Subhashini (NP) for the Respondents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

G KULDIP SINGH, J. This petition under Article 32 of the Constitution
of India, in public interest, has been filed by three prominent Citizens regarding
the alleged rape of two Nuns at Gajraula in Uttar Pradesh on July 13, 1990 by
criminals who broke into the residential quarters of St. Mary's Convent School
and assaulted several other Nuns before decamping with about Rs.1.10 lakhs
in cash.
H
· M.J. CHERIAN v. U.0.1. [KULDIP SINGH, J.] 253

This Court issued notice on November 26, 1990. Counter affidavits have A
been filed by senior Superintendent of Police, Muradabad, Shri Subhash Kajla,
S.H.O., Gajraula police station at the relevant time, and Dr. Meera Singh who
medically examined the Nuns.

The le~ed counsel appearing for the petitioners has pressed before us
only two of the many reliefs asked for in the writ petition. It is contended that ·B
the investigation of the case be entrusted to the Central Bureau of Investigation
(CBI) and the case be transferred from the file of Sessions Judge, Muradabad
to Sessions Judge, Delhi.

On July 13, 1990 at 6.20 A.M. sister Floreena, principal of St. Mary's
School lodged First Information Report at Police Station· Gajraula wherein she c
stated that she was living in the school campus along with her staff. On the
night between July 12/13, 1990 at about 2.00 A.M. three f!.!iscreants entered the
premises through the kitchen by breaking-open the window. They were not of
fair colour and were aged round about 20/24-30 years. AU of them were of
blackish complexion and were wearing under-wears. Third person who ap-
peared to be a gang-leader, was wearing underpant and baniyan. The miscre- D
ants man-handled the maid servant and snatched her ear-rings and wrist watch.
Thereafter all the miscreants went into the room where staff sisters Tara,
Tcssey, Anjla, Nisha, Roslit and Mamta were sleeping. The sisters were
threatened at the point of knife, iron-bar and sticks. The sisters were made to
sit in the room and one of the miscreants kept on standing outside the door with
some iron implements. The accused who was leader of the gang took sister E
Tara to another room by force and committed rape on her. On making hue and
cry, the sisters were given beating and were threatened to be killed. The
miscreant who was standing outside the door took sister Roslit by force to the
adjoining room and committed rape on her. All the three miscreants assaulted
sister Mamta, Anjali and other sisters. They ran-sacked the house and looted F
Rs.1,11,000/- by breaking the·almirah. The cash was kept for disbursing the
salaries of I.he staff and for payment to the book-seller. ·

The Senior Superintendent of Police in his counter-affidavit has stated
that accused Iqbal was arrested by the police on July 24, 1990 and by August
2, 1990 four accused persons namely, Sampat Lal, Iqbal, Jamil and Babu had G
been arrested. He further stated in his affidavit as under:

"Two wrist watches were recovered from Babu and one wrist
watch was recovered from Jameel in the presence of public
wimesses namely Deep Chand and Jai Karan. The victims ~un

- Floreena Tessey, Elsy, Sister Rinci, Nisha, Anjali and maid servant H
254 SUPREME COURT ~EPORTS [1991] SUPP. 3 S. C. R.

A . had als9arrived at the time of recovery of tl)e stolen.property, and
recognised the accused persons arrested .by the. police and the.
· recovered wrist watches."

The charge-sheet against the accused persons, according to the Senior
Superintendent of Police has been filed in .the Court on August 10, 1990.
B Regarding the identification of the accused persons before the, Magistrate,
Senior Superiotendent of Police has stated as under :

"About 7 dates from 27.8.90 to 1.10.90 were given to the sisters to
\ attend the identification parade of the accused persons in jail to
. identify them as well 8$ to identify the wrist watches before the
. Magistrate. They have however failed to identify the accused and
.. the stolen property before Magistrate."

The second Petitioner Paulose Vellakunnath who is a catholic priest has
filed rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by Senior Superintendent
of Police, Muradabad. In para 7 of the rejoinder it is stated as under:
D
''The arrest of four persons instead of three criminals who commit-
ted the crime is a travesty of justice. For Rev. Sisters stated that the
four arrested persons Iqbal, Sammarbal, Jameel and Babu were not
the real culprits. Rev. S.isters disowned the watches and disclaimed
the watches alleged to have been seized by the police from Iqbal
E and others. Despite this the police asked Rev. Sisters to accept the
four arrested persons a5 real culprits and get them convicted. The
fact is that the real culprits were two men and one adolescent."
Mr. Subash Kajala the then Station House Officer, Police Station,
Gajraula filed his affidavit in this Court on October 11, 1991. He has repeated
F what.the Senior Superintendent, Police has already stated in his affidavit. He
has also ·mentioned that the trial is pending in the court of IXth Additional
Sessions Judge, Muradabad wherein the charge was to be framed against the
accused persons on October 24,1991.
It is not necessary for us to go into various facts and circumstances
Q mentioned by the petitioners in the writ petition in support of their apprehen-
sions that the investigation in the case by the police was not fair and the victims
are not likely to get justice by the authorities in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Four
accused persons have been arrested in connection with the crime and the trial
against them is likely to cqmmence. The investigation having been completed
by the police and charge-sheet subm.itted to the court, it is not for this Court,
H ordinarily, to re-()pen the investigation specially by entrusting the same to a
·· M.J. CHERIAN v. U.O.L [KULDIP:SINGH, J.] · 255

specialised agency like CBI. We are also conscious that of-late the demand for A
CBI-investigation even in police cases is on-the.increase. Nevertheless - in a
given situation, to do justice between the parties and to instill confidence in the
puhlic mind-it may become necessaiy to ask the-CBI to investigate a crime.
It only shows the efficiency and the independence of the agency .
. ,•

It is obvious from the affidavit of the Senior Su1perintendent of Police that- B
the Nuns who are victims of the·tragedy are not coming forward to identify the
culprits in an identification parade to be held by the Magistrate. The petitioners
on the other hand, have alleged that the four persons who have been set up as
a~c'uscd by ttie police are not the real culprits and the police is asking the Sisters
to accept the ;four arrested persons as culprits. In the face of these averments
and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of'this ca5e, _we are of the view C
that ends of justice would be met if we direct the CBI lei hold further
investigation in respect of the offences committed between the night of July 12
and 13, 19_90 as per _the FIR lodged at Police Sµnion, Gajraula,

We are, however, not inclined to accept the prayer ofthe petitioners to
transfer the criminal case from the file of IXth Additional· Sessions Judge, D
Muradabad. ·

We, therefore; direct the CBI to take up the investigation of the case
immediately. We forther direct the Senior Superintendent of Police, Mu-
radabad and the Station House Officer, Gajraula Police Station to assist the
CBI in conducting the investigation. The State of Uttar Pradesh through its E
Chief Secretary and the Home Secretary 'is further directed to provide all
assistance
.
tO the CBI. in this respect. . ·

The CB.I shall complete ~e investigation within three months from today
and 'submit its report in accordance. with h1w. The proceedings oefore IXth
Additionai Sessions Judge, Muradabad shall remain stayed till March 16, 1992.
r. ' • ' ' . .
F
- • ~ t •

I ,
The writ petition
't
is,, , thus;
.. •
~
disposed of. < ": ; ' ! ..

r ( .,
G.N. L, a. - -
· Petitions· disposed of.
, . 1;' ·-. '

• ", '>
'. ~