Page 1

Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT     PETITION     (CRL.)     NO.     19     OF     2012   

Gulzar Ahmed Azmi & Anr.   …Petitioners

VERSUS

Union of India & Ors.                …Respondents

O     R     D     E     R      

Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.

1. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition under  

Article 32 read with Article 21 of the Constitution  

ostensibly in public interest in which the petitioners pray  

for a Writ of Mandamus for constitution of a Committee  

to make further investigation of all the bomb blasts cases  

which have taken place since 2002.

2. When we examine the relief prayed for by the petitioners,  

we find that there are as many as six substantive prayers  

made by them including constitution of a Committee  

Writ Petition (Crl.) No.19 of 2012           1 of 9

Page 2

headed by a retired Judge of the Supreme Court along  

with team of competent officers and experts to make  

further investigation of all bomb blasts cases which have  

taken place since 2002 onwards. The prayer specifically  

mentions a list by way of Annexure P-45 wherein the  

details have been mentioned in order to monitor the  

investigation to be ordered while granting any relief in the  

writ petition.  

3. The further prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to  

the respondents to initiate criminal or departmental  

action against the erring police officers for having  

implicated alleged innocent Muslim boys by fabricating  

false evidence.

4. The third prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to  

the respondents to initiate criminal or departmental  

action against the officers of Central and State  

Intelligence Agencies, who furnished wrong inputs to the  

Writ Petition (Crl.) No.19 of 2012           2 of 9

Page 3

State Police and thereby pressurised them to arrest  

innocent Muslim boys.   

5. In the fourth prayer the petitioners prayed for a direction  

to the respondents to make the contents of the laptops,  

recovered from Lt. Col. Purohit and Mahant Dayanand  

Pandey, public and thereafter make an inquiry for taking  

action against the culprits who were involved in anti-

national terror activities.

6. In the fifth prayer they seek for a direction to the first  

respondent for taking action against communal  

organisations like RSS, VHP and their allied forums who  

alleged to have indulged in bomb blasts cases and other  

terror related activities. In the last prayer they seek for a  

direction to release on bail the detenus arrested in bomb  

blasts cases referred to in Annexure P-45 against whom  

there is no clinching or conclusive evidence.

Writ Petition (Crl.) No.19 of 2012           3 of 9

Page 4

7. To sum-up the grievance of the petitioners, as per the  

averments contained  in the petition, is that the real  

culprits are being shielded from taking any action against  

them, while innocent Muslim boys have been roped in  

various bomb blasts cases throughout the country since  

the year 2002 and in order to unearth the said factor,  

this Court should direct the first respondent to constitute  

a Committee headed by a retired Judge of the Supreme  

Court who should be assisted with the team of officers  

having competent investigation skills along with other  

experts.  

8. At the very outset, we wish to state that if the prayer of  

the petitioners were to be accepted for whatever grounds  

stated in the petition and any such Committee is directed  

to be constituted that will only result in making a roving  

inquiry into the various criminal proceedings so far  

lodged connected with cases of bomb blasts all over the  

country. We are not, therefore, inclined to countenance  

such a wide prayer asked for in this writ petition.

Writ Petition (Crl.) No.19 of 2012           4 of 9

Page 5

9. Since criminal cases registered in connection with various  

incidents are either pending trial before the competent  

jurisdictional courts or being investigated by the  

jurisdictional police, it is premature to say whether any  

and if so which of the accused is innocent or has been  

falsely implicated.  If anyone is falsely roped in any  

offence either under the provisions of Indian Penal Code  

or under any other special enactments, by way of  

criminal proceeding, it is needless to state that there are  

enough safeguards provided under the various laws and  

under the criminal law jurisprudence, to protect the  

interest of any such person claiming himself to be  

innocent and demonstrate before the concerned Fora that  

he has been falsely implicated in any offence. Therefore, it  

will be for the concerned individual against whom any  

criminal proceeding is lodged to work out his remedy. For  

instance, if in any particular criminal case, one wishes to  

seek for further investigation under Section 173 (8) of the  

Cr.P.C. the same can always be effected even after the  

Writ Petition (Crl.) No.19 of 2012           5 of 9

Page 6

filing of the final report. Such a power existing with the  

Investigating Officer, having been statutorily provided, it  

will be a futile exercise if such a statutory exercise is to be  

entrusted with a supernumerary body created under the  

head of a retired Judge of the Supreme Court along with  

other team of officers and experts. When the time tested  

Criminal Procedure Code and other statutory provisions  

are working in the field providing for such well laid down  

procedure to be followed in the matter of regulating such  

criminal proceedings, the granting of the petitioners’  

prayer would amount to creating a parallel body without  

any statutory sanction and to function only under some  

directions of this Court which would be lacking in very  

many procedural details and will ultimately result in utter  

chaos and confusion in dealing with the criminal  

proceedings which have already been lodged and  

progressing before various criminal courts.

10. We are not, therefore, inclined to consider such a wide  

prayer applied for by the petitioners for constitution of a  

Writ Petition (Crl.) No.19 of 2012           6 of 9

Page 7

special Committee. The other directions prayed for by the  

petitioners will also only result in interfering with the  

already pending proceedings in which the concerned  

individuals who have been arrayed as accused or  

otherwise can seek for appropriate relief either for further  

investigation or for their discharge or in the event of any  

other adverse orders passed by the concerned Court,  

approach the higher fora for redressal of their grievances.  

There are various levels of Appellate Fora to examine the  

manner in which the proceedings are being pursued  

before the Courts wherein such criminal proceedings  

have already been lodged or in the event of any adverse  

orders having been passed, examine the correctness of  

such orders in order to grant appropriate relief or to  

confirm such decisions taken by the lower fora.  

11. It will be for the concerned individuals who face such  

criminal proceedings to work out their remedy in the  

manner known to law. Even if such individuals are not in  

a position to seek for any appropriate legal assistance on  

their own, having regard to the set up of Legal Service  

Writ Petition (Crl.) No.19 of 2012           7 of 9

Page 8

Authority and its effective functioning, in the nook and  

corner of the country, there should be no dearth of legal  

assistance for those affected persons to seek for such  

legal aid free of cost. Therefore, when there is no dearth  

for seeking legal assistance free of cost, on that score as  

well it cannot be held that the concerned individuals will  

be left with no remedy. In fact, it is now well known that  

on mere asking of the concerned presiding officer, those  

involved in such criminal proceedings are being offered  

free legal aid of high calibre in order to ensure that no  

innocent person is being punished for want of proper  

legal assistance.  

12. Having regard to the above factors, we do not find any  

scope to entertain this writ petition and leave it open for  

the concerned parties against whom any criminal  

proceeding is lodged to work out their remedies in the  

appropriate manner before the appropriate forum in  

accordance with law. The writ petition fails and the same  

is dismissed.

Writ Petition (Crl.) No.19 of 2012           8 of 9

Page 9

  …..……….……………………….....J.                     [T.S. Thakur]

 ……………………………………………J.

           [Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla]

New Delhi; October 11, 2012

Writ Petition (Crl.) No.19 of 2012           9 of 9