Page 1

1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.546 of 2004

Mohd. Jalees Ansari  and Others          ... Appellants

Versus

Central Bureau of Investigation            …. Respondent

J U D G M E N T

Uday U. Lalit, J.

1.     This appeal under Section 19 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities  

(Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as TADA Act) challenges the  

judgment and final order dated 28.02.2004 passed by the Designated Court  

Ajmer, Rajasthan in TADA Special Case No.6 of 1994. Originally sixteen  

accused persons were tried for having committed offences under TADA Act  

and other  enactments.  Accused No.6 Irfan Ahmad escaped from custody  

while the trial was going on and therefore his case was separated. He was

Page 2

2

later arrested in June, 2015 and is now being proceeded against separately.  

Accused No.12 Mohd. Azeemuddin though convicted and sentenced by the  

Designated Court was found to be juvenile on the date of occurrence in this  

appeal and as such his case stands separated. All the other accused namely  

A-1 to A-5, A-7 to A-11 and A-13 to A-16 are presently in appeal.  

2. There were bomb blasts in various trains during the night intervening  

5th and 6th of December, 1993.

(i)   An  explosion  occurred  around  10:50  p.m.  on  05.12.1993  in  

Rajdhani  Express  running from New Delhi  to  Howrah. In that  explosion  

near Kanpur Railway Station, two persons were injured.  FIR No.595/1993  

(Ext. P-307) of P.S. GRP Kanpur was accordingly registered.

(ii)  At about 5 a.m. in the morning of 06.12.1993 an explosion took  

place in Rajdhani Express running from Howrah to New Delhi in Kanpur  

Division.  However  no major  injury was suffered  by anyone.  This  led  to  

filing of FIR No.765 of 1993 (Ext. P 426) of P.S. GRP Allahabad which was  

later re-registered as FIR No.597 of 1993 of P.S. GRP Kanpur.

(iii)  An  explosion  occurred  at  about  5:15  a.m.  on  06.12.1993  in  

Rajdhani Express running from Mumbai Central to New Delhi near Kota  

Railway Station which caused injuries to five persons leading to registration  

of FIR No.174 of 1993 (Ext. P60) of P.S. GRP Kota.

Page 3

3

(iv) At about 6 a.m. on 06.12.1993 an explosion took place in Flying  

Queen running from Surat Railway Station to Mumbai Central, near Bestan  

Railway Station causing injury to one person. This led to lodging of FIR  

No.132 of 1993 (Ext. P 150) of P.S. GRP Valsad.

(v)  At  about  7:05  a.m.  on  06.12.1993  a  bomb  exploded  in  A.P.  

Express running from Hyderabad to Nizammudin. This explosion occurred  

in general compartment while the train was at Moula Ali Railway Station  

causing death of two persons. This led to registration of FIR No.251/1993  

(Ext.D-63) of PS GRP Malkajgiri.

(vi) A device meant to cause explosion was detected by a watchful  

passenger  in  Bangalore  Kurla  Express  while  the  train  was  near  Karjat  

Railway Station. The device was thrown out of the Railway compartment  

and as such did not cause any damage. This incident led to registration of  

FIR No.91 of 1993 (Ext.D-162) of PS GRP Karjat.

3. All the aforesaid six crimes were registered against unknown persons.  

Out of the aforesaid six incidents, the explosion that occurred at Maula Ali  

Station  in  Hyderabad  had  caused  death  of  two  persons.  PW  117  P.  

Chandrashekar  Reddy,  Superintendent  of  Police,  Ranga  Reddy  Distt,  on  

receiving information from Police Control Room reached the site at about  

8:30 a.m. on 06.12.1993 and dictated proceedings  Ext.P 450 later  in  the

Page 4

4

Police Station invoking provisions of  TADA Act.   Ext.P-450 was to  the  

following effect:-

“PROCEEDINGS OF THE SUPRINTENDENT OF POLICE:  RANGA  REDDY  DIST.  PRESENT:  SRI.  P.  CHANDRA  SEKHAR REDDY, IPS.,

No. 251/Camp/SP-RR/93 dated 06.12.1993

Sub:-Cr.No.251/93 of P.S. Malkajgiri  

Sri P. Radha Krishna Rao, Sub-Inspector of Police, Malkajgiri  P.S., sent the contents of the complaint given by Sri. Ahmed  Hussain, which revealed the facts that attracts Section 3, 4 and  5 of TADA besides others Sections of Law.  Having satisfied, I  am permitting the S.I.  to register the case U/s 3, 4 and 5 of  TADA besides other Sections of Law.

Sd/-  dated 06.12.1993

      Superintendent of Police, Ranga Reddy District

To Station House Officer, Malkajgiri P.S. Copy to S.D. P.O Malkajgiri for inf.”  

FIR No.251 of 1993 was therefore registered for offences punishable under  

Sections  3,  4  and  5  of  TADA Act  besides  other  provisions.  Out  of  the  

aforesaid six FIR’s only FIR No.251 at 1993 of PS GRP Malkhajgiri was  

registered for offences under TADA while the provisions of TADA were not  

initially invoked in rest of the FIR’s.

Page 5

5

4. Vide  notifications  dated  21.12.1993  and  28.12.1993  the  crimes  

registered by first  Five FIR’s,  where the explosions had in fact  occurred  

were transferred to Central Bureau of Investigation (“CBI”, for short) for  

investigation. The CBI thereafter re-registered the crimes as R.C. No.43(S) /

93 of CBI Lucknow, R.C. No.44 (S)/93 of CBI Lukcnow, R.C. No.37 (S)/93  

of CBI Jaipur, RC 43(S)/93 of CBI Ahmedabad and RC No.32 (S)/ 93 of  

CBI  Hyderabad  against  those  registered  under  Serial  No.(i)  to  (v)  

respectively  of  the preceding paragraph.   PW 148 R.P.  Kaushal  was  the  

Investigating Officer as regards both crimes registered at Lucknow.  He was  

also the Investigating Officer regarding the crime registered at Jaipur but  

was later  replaced by PW 150 P.D. Meena.   PW 145 K S Nair  was the  

Investigating Officer as regards the crime registered at Hyderabad.  He was  

initially  in  charge  of  investigation  regarding  the  crime  registered  at  

Ahmedabad as well, but was later replaced by PW 140 V.K. Bindal.

5. PW 145  K.S.  Nair  reached  Ahmedabad  on  28.12.1993  and  sent  a  

requisition on 29.12.1993 to the Director,  FSL, Ahmedabad and received  

Report Ext.  P-506 dated 30.12.1993. From reading of the documents and  

other case papers he found that the provisions of TADA Act were attracted  

to the case and therefore prepared Report dated 08.01.1994 seeking approval  

for adding provisions of TADA Act.  He was however required to go to

Page 6

6

Hyderabad on 11.01.1994.  While in Hyderabad, he came to know about  

arrest of A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari on 12.01.1994 in connection with Bombay  

Blast Case.  He, therefore, went to Mumbai on 13.01.1994 and reached STF  

Office  at  7:00 pm.   From his  interrogation,  involvement  of  said  A1 Dr.  

Jalees Ansari in the serial train blasts and that of A3 Habib Ahmed Khan and  

A4 M. Jamal Alvi was discovered.  

6. On 13.01.1994 PW 62 H.C. Singh, SP, STF, CBI also came down to  

Mumbai from New Delhi and PW 145 K.S. Nair had discussion with him in  

the matter including the result of the interrogation of A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari.  

PW 145 K.S. Nair, who was carrying with him copy of the Report prepared  

by him on 08.01.1994, submitted it to PW 62 H.C. Singh, whereupon PW 62  

H.C. Singh gave his approval for adding the provisions of TADA Act.  This  

Report Ext. P-246 was to the following effect.  

“Sub:   Investigation of RC 43(S)/93-CBI/Ahmedabad Case  RC  43(S)/93-CBI/Ahmedabad  has  been  registered  on  23.12.93 on transfer from the local police authorities u/s 307,  120-B IPC and Sec. 3,4,5 of Explosive Substances Act of 84,  and Sec. 3(2) of the Prevention of Damage of Public Properties  Act.

Facts in brief are that one bomb exploded in the flying  queen train which left Surat Station at 5:30 AM of 6-12-93 for  Bombay, in IInd class compartment No.7392(D-I) the train was  bound for Bombay.  The explosion took place exactly at 6.00  AM when the illfated train reached Bheistan Rly. Station.  One  person namely SH. Amish Piyushkar Shah aged about 23 years

Page 7

7

R/o Vanktash Appartment 7/A Ami Falia Surat, the attendant of  the complainant Shy. Ramniklal Malukchand Shah Head Clerk,  (Retd.), Rajkot Railway, had suffered head injuries on account  of bomb explosion.  The victim was seated in seat No.136 of D- 1  compartment  whereas  the  explosive  device  was  reportedly  kept  under  the  seat  “Sadiq”  for  his  journey  from  Surat  to  Bombay.  Investigation revealed that the said suspect  though  reserved the seat but did not travel in this train.  In all there  were reservations for 11 passengers including the suspect and  the victim in the said D-1 bogie.

The  exhibits  have  been  seized  from  the  scene  of  occurrence  by  the  local  police  authorities  and  sent  to  the  Forensic  Laboratory/Ahmedabad  for  expert  opinion.   The  seized articles included iron nails, clock pieces and the pieces  of Alfa luggage etc.  These articles were examined by Sh.SM  Darji,  Asstt.  Director,  FSL/Ahmedabad  and  opined  that  Amonium and nitrate redicles, (redicles of ammonium nitrate)  and  the  hydro  carbons  of  petrolium  oil  mixture  of  high  explosive  were  detected  in  the  exhibits.   Sh.B.P.,  Upadhayay,Asstt.  Director/FSL  after  examining  the  articles  seized from the scene of occurrence concluded that the bomb  was  kept  in  “Alfa  luggage”  with  electronic  clock  machine  needle  etc.  were  used  to  ensure  ‘delay  mechanism’.  Investigation also confirmed that the bomb exploded after half- an-hour  run from Surat  Station.   Director/FSL informed that  similar  explosive  devices  had  been  planted  in  other  running  trains  where  similar  bomb  explosions  had  taken  place  on  06.12.1993.   The  expert  opinion  clearly  indicates  that  the  suspect/suspects had planted the explosive device which comes  within the ambit of TADA and the facts reveals so far constitute  offence punishable U/Ss 3, 4 & 5 of the TADA (P) Act also.

The  sequential  nature  of  the  explosions  which  had  occurred  in  5  running trains  simultaneously  clearly  indicates  that there existed a deep rooted conspiracy to strike terror in the  people to cause loss to lives and damage to public properties it  is, necessary that Section 3, 4 & 5 of the TADA (P) Act for  further investigation in this case.  Copy of the expert opinions  of FSL/Ahmedabad is attached for perusal.

Page 8

8

Submitted please.  

(K.S. Nair) DY.SUPDT.OF POLICE CBI STF NEW DELHI

The facts revealed make out a case u/s 3 & 4 of TADA   (P) Act.  Inclusion of these Sections of law is approved. 1

Sd/- H.C.Singh

dated 13.01.1994 Supdt. of Police

C.B.I.  New Delhi”

7.  Since the applicability of the provisions of TADA Act was also found  

to have been made out as regards other crimes, a fax message was sent by  

PW  62  H.C.  Singh  to  SP  CBI  Lucknow  on  14.01.1994  requesting  that  

provisions of TADA Act be included and that A3 Habib Ahmed Khan and  

A4 M. Jamal Alvi be arrested.  This fax message, Ext. P-247 was as under:-

“FAX MESSAGE

TO SP CBI LUCKNOW  

FROM : SP CBI STF NEW DELHI CAMP: BOMBAY

REF NO. 35/94/CBI/STF, BOMBAY

1 This endorsement was in the handwriting of PW 62 HC Singh who then put his signature below the endorsement.

Page 9

9

   One  Dr.  Mohd.  Jalees  Ansari  arrested  in  1(S)/93/STF/Bombay(Bombay Bomb Blast case) has disclosed  that  the  planning  and  execution  of  bomb blasts  in  Rajdhani  Express Trains near Kanpur on 5/6.12.93 was done by Jamal  Alvi R/o Chawal Wali Gali, Nakhas Chow, Lucknow and Dr.  Habib R/o Kaharon Ka Adda, Rae Bareli. It is requested that  these  persons  be  arrested  in  RC  43  &  44(S)/93/CBI/LUCKNOW  and  further  investigations  carried  out.  CIO Sh. R. P. Kaushal Dy. SP is reaching Lucknow today  evening by flight No. IC-835.  The disclosures of  Dr. Jalees  Ansari reveal offences under Sections 3, 4 & 5 of TADA (P)  Act.  Hence these Sections of TADA (P) Act be included in the  case diary.  

Sd/- H.C. Singh

dated 14.1.1994 SP, CBI, STF NEW DELHI

CAMP AT BOMBAY”

8. While  PW 148 R.P.Kaushal  was at  SPE Headquarters  at  Delhi  on  

14.01.1994, he received information from PW 62 H.C. Singh who was then  

camping  at  Mumbai  that  he  should  go  to  Lucknow  immediately.   On  

reaching Lucknow on 15.01.1994 PW 148 R.P. Kaushal came to know that  

A3  Dr.  Habib  Ahmed  Khan  and  A4  Jamal  Alvi  had  been  arrested  on  

14.01.1994 by Lucknow Branch of CBI.  He also received the aforesaid fax  

message Ext. 247 regarding addition of Sections 3, 4 and 5 of TADA Act in  

both  the  cases.   On 15.01.1994,  he  submitted  an  application  Ext.  P-518  

under his signature seeking police remand of the arrested accused.  In this  

application, he had included the provisions of Sections 3, 4 and 5 of TADA

Page 10

10

Act. Another application namely Ext. P-521 was submitted seeking remand  

for  14  days.  This  application  had  also  included  aforesaid  provisions  of  

TADA Act.

9. The Investigating Team conducting investigation in connection with  

the crime registered at Jaipur was appraised of the disclosures coming from  

the interrogation of A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari that one of the suspects namely A2  

Ashfaque Khan lived  in Dausa in Rajasthan.  Immediately, search of the  

residence of A2 Ashfaque Khan was effected in which certain documents  

were seized indicating his complicity in the crime. A2 Ashfaque Khan was  

called for interrogation.  PW 34 Shankar Surolia, SP, CBI, SPE of Jaipur  

after having perused the seized documents and being satisfied  about the  

applicability of provisions of TADA Act, issued following order Ext. P-160  

on 15.1.1994  directing addition of Sections 3 and 4 of TADA Act in the  

matter.   

“Order

RC No. 37(S)/93 of SPE/CBI/Jaipur dated 15.01.1994  

I have gone through the Case Diaries, documents and statement  of accused Aspak Khan which clearly indicate that the accused  persons Dr. Jalees Ansari, Shameem Ansari R/o Bombay Aspak  Khan R/o Dausa and others conspired with each other during  the  year  1992-93  to  commit  the  terrorist  and  destructive  activities, to the harmony amongst different Sections of people  of  India  by using explosives  substances.   In  persons  planted

Page 11

11

bomb to kill the passengers and damage the Rajdhani Express  Train  Ex  Bombay  to  New Delhi,  in  Coach  No.  C-7,  which  exploded at about 5.15 AM on 6.12.93 between Indragarh and  Amli  Stations.   The  blast  caused  injuries  to  the  various  passengers  and  damages  to  the  public  property.   Thus,  the  accused persons have committed offences punishable u/s 3 & 4  of  TADA (P) 1987 in addition to  Sections mentioned in the  FIR.  I therefore, direct Sh. R. D. Kalia, Inspector, CBI, Jaipur  to proceed with the investigation accordingly.  

Sd/- Supdt. of Police

SPE, CBI, Jaipur”

The provisions of TADA Act thus stood invoked in all  the crimes.

10. When A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari was arrested in connection with Bombay  

Blast Case, 7 firearms, 2 grenades, 20 detonators, live cartridges, plastic bag  

containing  explosives  and  timer  device  were  found  during  search  and  

seizure.  At the time of arrest of A2 Ashfaque Khan, visiting card of A1 Dr.  

Jalees Ansari as well as diary containing name of ‘Abdullah’ with a phone  

number was found.  Similarly, at the time of arrest of A4 Jamal Alvi, certain  

arms and explosives were recovered.  

11. On 20.01.1994 application Ext.D-198 was moved on behalf of A5  

Afaque Khan that said Accused was in illegal detention of CBI, to which a  

reply was filed in the Court at Lucknow that the Accused was interrogated

Page 12

12

on 17.1.1994 and was called for further interrogation on 21.01.1994. It may  

be noted that a telegram was sent on 18.01.1994 to the Hon’ble President of  

India that said accused was in the confinement of CBI.  However according  

to the Record, A5 Afaq Khan was arrested at 10 p.m. on 20.01.1994 by  

Delhi Police in connection with Case no. 46/94 of P.S. Malviya Nagar, New  

Delhi under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of TADA Act.

12. On 28th and 29th January, 1994, a confessional statement Ext. P 248 of  

A2 Ashfaque Khan came to be recorded under Section 15 of TADA Act by  

PW 62 H.C. Singh. The confessing accused was produced before PW 62  

H.C. Singh on 28.01.1994, on which date PW 62 H.C. Singh gave him 24  

hours time to think over the matter. The confession was recorded the next  

day. In his confessional  statement A2 Ashfaque Khan disclosed how he  

came in contact with A1 Dr. Jaless Ansari and how he procured explosive  

material for him.  

13. On 02.02.1994 a  confessional  statement  of  A5 Afaque Khan,  Ext.  

241-A under  Section 15 of  TADA Act  was recorded by PW 61 Prabhat  

Singh, DCP, South Delhi. The first part of the statement was recorded by  

one Nepal Singh in his handwriting. It was stated in the confession that A5  

Afaque Khan was present in a meeting held in the last week of September

Page 13

13

1993 which meeting was attended by A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari, A3 Dr. Habib  

and A4 Dr. Jamal Alvi and others in which it was planned and decided to  

cause explosion of bombs in long distance prestigious trains. It was further  

stated by him that he had fixed the circuit and timing in bombs.  On the  

same day, A6 Irfan Khan was produced before PW 61 Prabhat Singh and his  

confessional statement Ext. P-243 was recorded.

14. On 06.02.1994 as A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari desired to give confessional  

statement; he was produced in CBI office before PW 62 H.C. Singh, who  

gave him warning that such statement could be used against him and gave  

him 24 hours time to reflect over the matter.  A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari was again  

produced the next day i.e. on 07.02.1994, when PW 62 H.C. Singh recorded  

his  confession  Ext.  P  250.   It  was  stated  in  the  confession  that  after  

completing his MBBS, he had initially joined service as Doctor in Public  

Health Department and later did private practice, that he had planted a bomb  

in Malegaon for which he was arrested and later released on bail, that during  

the  year  1992-1993  he  continued  to  plant  bombs  at  various  places  in  

Mumbai and in trains which claimed some lives, that he met A2 Ashfaque  

Khan who supplied him detonators and gelatin sticks. He, therefore, narrated  

how he and other accused had planned and executed the explosions that  

occurred on 5th and 6th December 1993.

Page 14

14

15. On 12.02.1994 A3 Dr. Habib Ahmed Khan was produced before PW  

62 HC Singh in his office at New Delhi as he wanted to make a confessional  

statement. The accused was given 24 hours time to think over the matter. A3  

Dr. Habib Ahmed Khan was again produced the next day and his confession  

Ext. P-251 under Section 15 of TADA Act was recorded.  

16. On 16.02.1994 PW 103 K.M. Reddy, Deputy Commissioner of Police  

Hyderabad  recorded  confessional  statements  of  A11  Md.  Shamsuddin  

(Ext.P. 427-428) of A12 Md. Azeemuddin (Ext. P. 429-430) and of A13 Md.  

Yusuf (Ext. P 431-432). These three confessions were recorded in Crime  

No.336  of  1993,  Abid  Road  Police  Station,  Hyderabad.   In  these  

confessions,  the confessing accused stated how they were associated with  

A1  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  and  how  they  had  assisted  in  planting  bomb  at  

Secundrabad Railway Station in September 1993 and in A.P. Express on the  

morning of 06.12.1993.

17. On 17.02.1994 A4 M. Jamal Alvi was produced before PW 62 HC  

Singh as the accused wanted to make a confessional statement.  PW 62 HC  

Singh gave him 24 hours time to think over. He was again produced on  

18.02.1994  and  PW  62  HC  Singh  proceeded  to  record  his  confessional  

statement (Ext.P 253).

Page 15

15

18. On  28.02.1994  A1  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  was  produced  before  the  

Designated  Court,  Bombay  with  application  under  Section  169  Cr.  P.C.  

preferred by CBI seeking his discharge from Bombay Bomb Blasts Case. It  

was stated that after investigation the accused was not found to be connected  

with  Bombay  Bomb  Blasts  case.  Accordingly,  the  Designated  Court  

discharged A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari from Bombay Bomb Blasts case. On the  

same day an application namely MA 72 of 1994 was preferred by PW 150  

PD Meena seeking custody of A1 Jalees Ansari which was given to him by  

the Designated Court. The material recovered at the time of his arrest and  

during search and seizure was also made over. Thereafter, on 01.03.1994 A1  

Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  was  produced in TADA Court,  Ajmer,  Rajashthan  but  

since the presiding officer was on leave he was produced before Additional  

Sessions Judge, Ajmer who gave two days remand. On 04.03.1994 A1 Dr.  

Jalees Ansari was produced before TADA Court which remanded him to  

judicial custody.  

19. On 08.03.1994 A8 Mohd. Saleem Ansari was produced before PW 9  

K.V. Reddy, Deputy Commissioner of Police,  North Zone,  Hyderabad in  

connection  with Crime No.151 of  1993 registered under  TADA Act  and  

other offences, as the accused desired to give a confessional statement. In

Page 16

16

the confession (Ext.P-444) recorded by PW 109 K.V. Reddy, the confessing  

accused accepted his role in Bomb Blasts of Humayun Nagar Police Station  

and Abid Road Police Station and that he was also associated in planting the  

Bomb on 06.12.1993 in A.P. Express.

20. On the same day a confessional statement (Ext.P 445) of A 10 Mohd.  

Nissarudin was also recorded by PW 109 K.V. Reddy in connection with  

Crime  No.336  of  1993,  Abid  Road  Police  Station,  Hyderabad.  The  

confessing  accused  in  said  confessional  statement  accepted  his  role  in  

planting of Bomb in the compartment of A.P. Express on 06.12.1993 and  

that he was also having two other Bombs which were meant for use in K.K.  

Express on the same day but because of his ill health he could not use them.

21. On 26.04.1994 an order was passed clubbing all five cases as they  

were  found  to  be  outcome  of  a  single  conspiracy.  The  order  dated  

26.04.1994 (Ext.P 259) was to the following effect:-

“ORDER

Investigations  in  the  under  mentioned  cases  relating  bomb blasts  in  prestigious  trains  on  5/6.  12.93,  which  were  registered in concerned Branches of the CBI  have revealed that  these bomb blasts were outcome of a single conspiracy. Hence ,  for better appreciation of facts and through investigation of the  cases, the investigation in these cases STF, New Delhi will be  the  C.I.O of  these  cases.  The present  arrangement  of  CIO’S

Page 17

17

from STF and Assisting IO’s from the concerned branches for  these cases will, however, continue.

(i)  RC 32(S)/93/CBI/Hyderabad. (ii) RC 43(S)/93/CBI/Ahmedabad (iii) RC 37 (S)/93/CBI/Jaipur (iv) RC 43 (S)/93/CBI/Lucknow (v) RC 44(S)/93/CBI/Lucknow

En dt. No. 8/94/STF/BB/1396 Dt. 26.4.1994        (Arun Bhagat)    Addl. Director CBI(S)”

22. On 01.07.1994 a confessional statement (Ext.P 434-435) of A9 Mohd.  

Zaheeruddin was recorded by PW 105 Rajeev Trivedi in connection with  

Crime No.636 of 1996, Abid Road, P.S.,  Hyderabad. In this confessional  

statement the accused stated about his association with A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari  

and about his acts of planting bomb at Humayun Nagar, Abid Road, P.S. and  

Secundrabad  Railway  Reservation  Complex  and  also  about  his  role  in  

planting  a  bomb  in  the  unreserved  compartment  of  A.P.  Express  on  

06.12.1993.

23.  On 26.07.1994 A7 Fazlur Rehman was produced before PW 62 H.C.  

Singh in the office of Superintendent of Police, CBI, Jaipur as the accused  

wanted to make a confessional statement.  PW 62 H.C. Singh gave him 24  

hours time to think over the matter.  The accused was again produced on  

27.07.1994  on  which  date  his  confessional  statement  Ext.P  255  was

Page 18

18

recorded.  In  his  confessional  statement  the  accused  stated  about  his  

association with A1 Jalees Ansari.  

24. On 28.08.1994, PW 107 K. Vijaya Rama Rao, Inspector General of  

Police and Director CBI accorded sanction (Ext.P 437) under Section 20 A  

(2) of TADA Act to prosecute accused Nos. 1 to 13 for offences punishable  

under TADA Act and other enactments.  A Charge-sheet Ext.P 266 dated  

25.08.1994 was thereafter  filed in the court  of  Designated Court,  Ajmer,  

Rajasthan  against  accused  Nos.1  to  13.  The  charge-sheet  also  included  

sanction  order  dated  19.09.1994 passed  by the  Deputy  Commissioner  of  

Police, Mumbai under Arms Act in respect of various arms recovered from  

A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari and sanction order dated 22.07.1994 passed by Distt.  

Magistrate, Lucknow in respect of Arms and Explosives recovered from A4  

M. Jamal Alvi.

25. After  filing  of  the  aforesaid  charge-sheet  A14  Md.  Amin  was  

apprehended.  He  having  desired  to  give  confessional  statement,  was  

produced before PW 62 H.C. Singh on 17.11.1994.  PW 62 H.C. Singh gave  

him  time  of  24  hrs.  to  think  over  the  matter.  The  accused  was  again  

produced on 18.11.1994 on which date the confessional  statement of  the  

accused Ext.P 257 came to be recorded. In his confessional statement the

Page 19

19

accused disclosed his association with A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari and how the  

said accused was taught by him to make bomb devices.  

26. A  supplementary  charge-sheet  (Ext  P-267)  dated  18.04.1995  was  

thereafter filed against A14 Mohd. Amin in the Designated Court.  This was  

preceded by order of sanction (Ext. P-438) under Section 20 A (2) of TADA  

Act by PW 107 V. Rana Rao.

27. On 21.05.1996, Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, Designated  

Court under TADA Act ordered discharge of accused under the provisions  

of TADA Act in four cases namely Sessions Case Nos.438 of 1994, 584 of  

1994, 13 of 1995 and 14 of 1995.  Sessions Case No.438 of 1994 arose from  

FIR No.336 of 1993 of Police Station Abid Road in which confessions of  

present accused Nos.9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 were recorded.  Apart from present  

accused Nos.9, 10, 11, 12 and 13, A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari, A8 Saleem Ansari  

and others were also accused in those Sessions Cases.  It was observed by  

the  Designated  Court  that  none  of  the  FIRs  in  those  four  cases  was  

registered under any of the provisions of TADA Act.  It found that there was  

no prior approval in writing to invoke the provisions of TADA Act and as  

such the entire case had to be transferred under Section 18 of TADA Act to

Page 20

20

the competent Court for disposal.  It further found that sanctions to prosecute  

under Section 20 A (2) of TADA Act were also invalid.  

28. This  decision  of  the  Designated  Court  dated  21.05.1996  was  

challenged by State of Andhra Pradesh by preferring Criminal Appeal Nos.  

2010-2013 of 1996 in this Court. By its order dated 17.04.20012, this Court  

was prima facie of the opinion that the exercise of power under Section 20 A  

(2) of TADA Act by the then Commissioner of Police was in a very casual  

manner and as such this Court deemed it appropriate to issue notice to the  

concerned Commissioner to show cause why adverse remarks against him  

be not made in the judgment by which the appeal was to be disposed of.  

The record indicates that thereafter on 17.07.2001, at the request of State of  

Andhra Pradesh, the aforesaid appeals were allowed to be withdrawn and  

consequently  notice  issued  to  the  then  Commissioner  of  Police  stood  

discharged.   With  the  withdrawal  of  appeals,  the  order  passed  by  the  

Designated Court holding the invocation of TADA Act under Section 20 A  

(1) in respect of four crimes including one under FIR No.336 of 93 to be  

invalid, attained finality.   

2 2001 (3) Crimes 389 (SC)

Page 21

21

29. A15 Aizaz Akbar who was apprehended sometime in 1997, desired to  

make confessional  statement.   He was therefore produced on 01.06.1997  

before PW1 O.P. Chhatwal who gave him 24 hours time to think over the  

matter.  The accused was thereafter produced on 02.06.1997 before PW1  

O.P.Chhatwal who recorded his confession (Ext. P-1).  In his confession, the  

accused  stated  that  he  used  to  work  as  Computer  Operator  with  M/s  

Tawakkal  Travels,  Mumbai,  that  he  was  associated  with  A1  Dr.  Jalees  

Ansari and that he had gone to Hyderabad alongwith A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari  

and had planted bomb at Humayun Nagar, Police Station and at Habib Road,  

Police Station in August, 1993.  He further stated how he had planted bomb  

in Bangalore-Kurla Express.  

30. On 26.07.1997 second  supplementary  charge  sheet  (Ext.D-53)  was  

filed against A15 Aizaz Akbar and six other absconding accused. This was  

preceded by order of  sanction  Ext.P-471 dated 25.07.1997 under Section  

20A (2) of TADA Act accorded by PW 130 R.C. Sharma, Inspector General  

of Police and Director CBI, New Delhi.

31. Thereafter A16 Abre Rehmat Ansari was arrested. Since he desired to  

make a confessional statement, he was produced before PW 1 O.P. Chhatwal  

on 01.01.1998 on which date he was given 24 hours time to think over the

Page 22

22

matter.  The  accused  was  again  produced  on  02.01.1998  when  his  

confessional statement Ext. P-4 was recorded under Section 15 of TADA  

Act. In his confession, A16 stated his full name to be Abre Rehmat Ansari  

and  that  he  was  also  known by  name  ‘Kari’.  It  was  stated  that  he  had  

received  training  in  Pakistan  where  they  were  instigated  to  indulge  in  

subversive  activities,  that  he  participated  in  four  firing  incidents  at  

CRPF/BSF bunkers,  that  in  Aug-Sep 1993 he  was  introduced  to  A4 M.  

Jamal Alvi, that he had supplied him arms and explosives in Oct-Nov 1993  

and that he had also supplied 5kg of explosives, 4 detonators and 4 timers to  

A4 M. Jamal Alvi.

32. A third supplementary chargesheet Ext.P-513 was filed on 23.03.1998  

against  A16 Abrey Rehmat Ansari.  Sanction under Section 20A(2) dated  

27.02.1998 (Ext.P 469) for such prosecution was accorded by PW 128 D.R.  

Karthikeyan, Inspector General of Police and Director CBI, New Delhi.  

33. On 13.10.1999 the Designated Court passed Order framing charges  

against Accused Nos.1 to 16.  Accordingly they were charged for having  

committed offences punishable under TADA Act and other enactments.  For  

facility, paragraphs 86 to 92 of the judgment of the Designated Court which  

set out charges against the Accused, are quoted as under:

Page 23

23

“86. After hearing both the parties, accused (A-1) Dr. Mohd.  Jalees Ansari, (A-11) Mohd.Shamsuddin @ Painter Baba, (A- 14) Mohd. Amin were charged u/s 120-B IPC, Sections 3(3), 5  &  6  of  TADA  Act,  Sections  4(a)  &  4(b)  of  Explosive  Substances  Act  and  Section  9(B)  of  Explosive  Act.   These  accused have also been charged u/s 3(2), 5 and 6 of TADA Act,  Section 3, 4(a) and 4(b) of  Explosive Substances Act. Section  9(B) of Explosive Act, Section 4 of Prevention of Damages to  Public Property Act,  Sections 150 & 151 of Indian Railways  Act  and  Sections  302,  307,  326,  324  & 436  IPC with  each  offence.

87. Accused  (A-2)  Ashfaque  Khan,  (3)  Dr.  Habib  Ahmed  Khan,  (A-5)  Mohd.  Afaq  Khan,   (A-9)  Mohd.  Zahiruddin  Ahmed @ Ahmed, (A-10) Mohd.Nissaruddin @ Mujju, (A-16)  Abre  Rehmat  Ansari  @ Kari,  were  charged  u/s  120-B  IPC,  Section  3(3)  &  6  of  TADA Act,  Sections  4(a)  and  4(b)  of  Explosive  Substances  Act,  Section  9(B)  of  Explosive  Act.  These accused have also been charged u/s 3(2), 5 & 6 of TADA  Act,  Section  3,  4(a)  and  4(b)  of  Explosive  Substances  Act,  Section 9(B)  of  Explosives  Act.   Section 4 of  Prevention of  Damages to Public Property Act,  Sections 150 & 151 of Indian  Railways Act,  Sections 302, 307, 324, 326 and 436 r/w Section  120-B IPC with each offence.

88. Accused (A-4) Mohd. Jamal Alvi was charged u/s 120-B  IPC, Sections 3(3), and 6 of TADA Act,  Sections 4(a) and 4(b)  of Explosive Substances Act, Section 9(b) of Explosives Act,  Section 25(1-B) Arms Act.  This accused was also charged u/s  3(2),  5  and  6  of  TADA  Act,  Sections  3,  4(a)  and  4(b)  of  Explosive  Substances  Act,  Section  9(B)  Explosives  Act,  Section 4 of  Prevention of  Damages to Public  Property Act,  Sections 150 & 151 of Indian Railways Act, Sections 302, 307,  324,  326 and 436 IPC r/w Section  120-B of  IPC with  each  offence.  

89. Accused (A-6) Irfan Ahmed, (A-15) Mohd. Aizaz Akbar  were  charged  u/s  120-B,  307 IPC,   Section  3(2),  3(3),  6  of  TADA  Act,  Section  4(a),  4(b)  Explosive  Substances  Act,

Page 24

24

Section 9(B) Explosives Act,  Section 150 of Indian Railways  Act.   These accused have also been charged u/s 3(2), 5 & 6 of  TADA Act, Sections 3, 4(a) & 4(b) of Explosive Substances  Act, Section 9(b) of Explosives Act, Section 4 of Prevention of  Damages to Public Property Act, Section 150 & 151 of Indian  Railways  Act,  Section  302,  307,  326,  324 and 436 IPC r/w  Section 120-B IPC with each offence.

90. Accused  (A-7)  Fazlur  Rehman  Sufi  @  Shamin  was  charged u/s 120-B, 307, 324, 326 and 436 IPC, Sections 3(2),  3(3),  5  &  6  of  TADA  Act,  Sections  3,  4(a)  and  4(b)  of  Explosive  Substances  Act,  Section  9(B)   of  Explosives  Act,  Section 4 of  Prevention of  Damages to Public  Property Act.  Sections  150  & 151  of  Indian  Railways  Act.   He  had  also  charged u/s 3(2), 5 & 6 of TADA Act, Sections 3, 4(a) and 4(b)  of Explosive Substances Act, Section 9(B) of Explosives Act,  Section 4 of  Prevention of  Damages to Public  Property Act,  Sections 150 & 151 of Indian Railways Act, Sections 302, 307,  324,  326  &  436  IPC  r/w  Section  120-B  of  IPC  with  each  offence.  

91. Accused  (A-8)  Mohd.  Saleem Ansari  was  charged u/s  120-B, Section 3(3) of TADA Act.  He was also charged u/s  3(2),  5  &  6  of  TADA  Act,  Sections  3,  4(a)  and  4(b)  of  Explosive  Substances Act,   Section 9(B) of Explosives Act,  Section 4 of  Prevention of  Damages to Public  Property Act.  Sections 150 & 151 of Indian Railways Act.  Sections 302, 307,  324,  326 and 436 IPC r/w Section  120-B of  IPC with  each  offence.  

92. Accused(A-12) Mohd. Azeemuddin @ Azeem and (A- 13) Mohd. Yusuf were charged u/s 120-B, 307, 324, 326 & 436  IPC, Sections 3(2), 3(3) and 6 of TADA Act. Section 3, 4(a),  4(b)  Explosive  Substances  Act,  Section  9(B)  Explosive  Act,  Section  4  Prevention  of  Damages  to  Public  Property  Act.  Sections 150 & 151 of Indian Railways Act.  These accused  were also charged u/s 3(2), 5 and 6 of TADA Act,  Sections 3,  4(a), 4(b) Explosive Substances Act.  Section 9(B) Explosives  Act,  Section 4 Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act,  Section 150 & 151 Indian Railways Act,  Sections 302, 307,

Page 25

25

324,  326  &  436  IPC   r/w  Section  120-B  IPC  with  each  offence.”

34. In  support  of  its  case,  the  Prosecution  examined  150  witnesses,  

exhibited documents Ext.P-1 to Ext.P-535, produced and marked 23 articles  

and relied upon confessions of Accused A1 to A16.  A6 having absconded,  

Accused  A1  to  A5  and  A7  to  A16  were  examined  under  Section  313,  

Cr.P.C.  All the accused denied the case of the Prosecution and submitted  

that  their  confessions were not  voluntary.   The accused produced twenty  

witnesses  namely  DW-1  Mohammed  Jalees  Ansari  (A-1),  DW-2  

Mohammed Yusuf (A-13), DW-3 Mohd. Azeemuddin (A-12), DW-4 Mohd.  

Nisaruddin Ahmed (A-10), DW-5, Mohd. Zaheeruddin Ahmed (A-9), DW-6  

Mohiuddin Jamal Aliv (A-4), DW-7 Abre Rehamt Ansari,  (A-16), DW-8  

Mohammed Anis Ansari,  DW-9 Javed Akhtar Ansari,  DW-10 Jekahullah  

Ansari,  DW-11  Mohamed  Amin  (A-14),  DW-12  Rabani  Aliv,  DW-13  

Sarafuddin,  DW-14  Mohd.  Saleem  Ansari  (A-8),  DW-15  Mohd.  Aizaz  

Akbar (A-15), DW-15 Anwar Jamal Alvi, DW-17 Asharfi Fazlur Rehmman  

(A-7), DW-18 Mohammed Afaq (A-5), DW-19 Mohd. Shamsuddin (A-11),  

DW-20 Yusuf Khan.  The accused exhibited 204 documents in defence.

Page 26

26

35. After  considering  the  entire  material  on  record  and  hearing  rival  

submissions,  the  Designated  Court  considered  the  matter  in  the  light  of  

following points:

“(i) Whether prior approval to apply the provisions of TADA  Act as required under Section 20-A (1) of the TADA Act and  sanction to take cognizance of  the offence as required under  Section 20-A(2) of the TADA Act is valid?

(ii) Whether  accused  A-1  Dr.  Mohd.  Jalees  Ansari,  A-2  Ashfaque Khan, A-3 Dr. Habib Ahmed Khan, A-4 M. Jamal  Alvi,  A-5  Mohd.  Afaq Khan,  A-6 Irfan  Ahmed,  A-7 Fazlur  Rehman Sufi @ Asharfi E Shamin, A-8 Mohd. Saleem Ansari,  A-9  Mohd.  Zaheeruddin  Ahmed  @  Ahmed,  A-10  Mohd.  Nissaruddin  @  Mujju,  A-11  Mohd.  Shamsuddin  @  Painter  Baba, A-12 Mohd. Azeemuddin @ Azeem, A-13 Mohd. Yusuf,  A-14  Mohd.  Amin,  A-15  Mohd.  Aizaz  Akbar,  A-16  Abare  Rehmat  Ansari  @  Kari  along  with  the  absconding  accused  Sayed Abdul Karim, Mohd. Tuffail, Mohd. Hamir -Ul Uddin @  Hamid,  Mohd. Saleem, Nisar Ahmed Ansari @ Tahir Ahmed,  during the year 1993-94 on various dates entered into criminal  conspiracy  at  Bombay,  Lucknow,  Kanpur,  Dausa,  Baroda,  Surat, Kota Hyderabad, Gulbarga and other places to terrorize  the  Government  of  India,  to  strike  terror  in  the  people,  to  adversely affect the harmony amongst Hindus and Muslims by  keeping  bombs,  explosives  substances  on  5.12.1993  and  6.12.1993 in important  trains  of  India  viz.  Rajdhani  Express  trains  from  Mumbai  to  New  Delhi,  New  Delhi  to  Howrah,  Howrah to New Delhi,  Flying Queen Express from Surat to  Bombay,  Andhra  Pradesh  Express  from  Hyderabad  to  New  Delhi, train from Bangalore to Kurla, to commit terrorist acts to  cause train bomb blasts and thereby to cause death, grievous  injuries  to  person  travelling  in  the  said   trains,   to  cause  damage,  destruction  to  railway,  public  property  and  also  to  send,  procure,  manufacture explosives substances and also to  attack ‘Samna Press’ of Shiv Sena on 15.1.1994 and to commit  terrorist act at Delhi on 26.1.1994?

Page 27

27

(iii) Whether  accused  A-1  to  A-16  along  with  absconding  accused during the year 1993-94, at above mentioned places in  pursuance  of  the  criminal  conspiracy  intentionally  made  available  bombs,  explosive  substances  to  co-accused  which  were to be used for terrorist acts for causing bomb blasts in the  above mentioned trains?

(iv) Whether in pursuance of the criminal conspiracy accused  A-1 to A-16 procured explosive substances and explosives and  kept the explosive substances unauthorisedly in their possession  in  a  notified  area  for  which  they  had  no  licence  and  manufactured  bombs  for  unlawful  objects  and  were  kept  unlawfully and maliciously to endanger life and property and  for  causing  bomb  blasts  in  the  above  mentioned  trains  for  which the accused A-1 to A-16 are liable as members of the  said criminal conspiracy?

(vi) Whether in pursuance of the said conspiracy the accused  on 5-6/12/1993 kept bomb devices at Kanpur,  Baroda railway  stations  in  Rajdhani  Express  Trains  from  Howrah  to  New  Delhi,  from New  Delhi  to  Howrah,   from Bombay  to  New  Delhi,  respectively  which  exploded  causing  injuries  to  six  passengers.   Further,  bomb  device  was  kept  at  Hyderabad  Railway Station in Andhra Pradesh Express from Hyderabad to  New  Delhi,  which  exploded  resulting  in  death  of  two  passengers Abdul Majid and Smt. Jeevan Jyoti and injuries to  fourteen  passengers,  bomb  device  was  also  kept  at  Surat  Railway station in Flying Queen Express from Surat to Bombay  which exploded causing injuries to one passenger and further  bomb device was kept at Pune Railway Station in Bangalore –  Kurla  Express  train  for  causing  explosion.  The  bomb  explosions in the above trains caused damage to railway-public  property and for the above acts accused A-1 to A-16 are liable  as members of the said criminal conspiracy?”

36. The Designated Court found prior approval under Section 20A(1) of  

TADA Act in the present matter, namely Ext.P-45-, P-246, P-247 and P-160

Page 28

28

and Orders of Sanction under Section 20A(2) namely  Ext.P-437, P-438, P-

469 and P-471 to be valid  and in  accordance  with law.   In  view of  the  

confessional statement and other prosecution evidence, it found that it was  

proved beyond reasonable doubt that Accused Nos.1 to 5 and Accused Nos.7  

to 16 had conspired and caused terrorist acts by causing bomb blasts in six  

trains on 5th & 6th December, 1993 and found A1 to A5 and A7 to A14 and  

A16 guilty  of  the offences  punishable  under  Section  3(3)  of  TADA Act  

while A15 was found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 3(3) of  

TADA Act read with Section 120-B IPC.

37. The  Designated  Court  by  its  judgment  and  final  order  dated  

28.02.2004  convicted  and  sentenced  the  accused  for  various  offences  as  

detailed in following paragraphs 537 to 543 of its judgment:

“537: Accused A-1 Dr. Mohammed Jalees Ansari, A-9 Mohd.  Zaheeruddin Ahmed @ Ahmed, A-11 Mohammed Shamsuddin  @ Painter Baba, A-12 Mohammed Azeemuddin @ Azeem, A- 13 Mohammed Yusuf are guilty of the offences punishable u/s  120-B I.P.C., Section 3(2) (i), 3(2) (ii), 3(3), 5, 6(1) TADA Act,  1987  Sections  302,  307,  326,  324,  436  I.P.C.,  Sections  3,4  Explosive Substances Act, Sec. 9-B Explosives Act,  Sections  150,  151  Railways  Act,  Section  4  prevention  of  Damage  to  Public Property Act.  

Under Section 120-B I.P.C. Sec. 3(2) (I) TADA Act, Sec. 3(3)  TADA  Act,  Sec.302  I.P.C.,  each  of  the  above  accused  are  sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5000/- on each

Page 29

29

count. In default of payment of fine each of them shall further  undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.  

Under Section 150 Railways Act, each of the above accused are  sentenced to life imprisonment.  

Under  Section  3(2)(ii),  5,  6(1)  TADA  Act,  Sec.  307  I.P.C.  Sections 3 & 4, Explosive Substances Act, each of the above  accused are sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment and a  fine of Rs.2500/- on each count. In default of payment of fine  each of them shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for  six months.  

Under  Section  9-B Explosives  Act,  each  of  the  accused  are  sentenced  to  two years  rigorous  imprisonment  and a  fine  of  Rs.2500/-.  In default  of  payment of payment of fine each of  them  shall  further  undergo  rigorous  imprisonment  for  six  months.  

Since, each of the above accused has been sentenced u/s 307  I.P.C.,  Section  150 Railways  Act,  no  separate  151 Railways  Act,  Sec. 4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, is  awarded.  

538. Accused  A-2 Ashfaque Khan is  guilty  of  the  offences  punishable  u/s  120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.  3(2)  (I)  TADA  Act  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.  3(2)  (ii)  TADA  Act  r/w  Sec.  120-B  I.P.C., Sections 3(3), 5,6(1) TADA Act, Sec.302 r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C., Sec.307 r/w 120-B I.P.C., Sec.326 r/w 120-B I.P.C., Sec.  324  r/w  Sec.120-B,  Sec.436  r/w  Sec.  120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.3  Explosive  Substances  Act  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.4  Explosive  Substances  Act,  Sec.9-B  Explosives  Act,  Sec.150  Railways Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.151 Railways Act r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.4  Prevention  of  Damage  to  Public  Property Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.  

a) Under Section 120-B I.P.C., Sec. 3(2) (i) TADA Act r/w  Sec. 120-B I.P.C., Sec. 3 (3) TADA Act, Sec.302, r/w Sec.120- B  I.P.C.  A-2  is  sentenced  to  life  imprisonment  and  fine  of

Page 30

30

Rs.5,000/-  on each count.  In default  of  payment of  fine A-2  shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.  

b) Under Section 150 Railways Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C. A- 2 is sentenced to life imprisonment.  

c) Under  Section  3(2)  (ii)  TADA  Act  r/w  Section120-B  I.P.C.,  Section  5,6(1)  TADA  Act,  Sec.307  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C., Sec.3 Explosive Substances Act, r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Section4  Explosive  Substances  Act,  A-2  is  sentenced  to  ten  years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2500/- on each  count. In default of payment of fine A-2 shall further undergo  rigorous imprisonment for six months.  

d) Under Section 9-B Explosive Act A-2 is sentenced to two  years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2500/- in default  of  payment  of  fine  A-2  shall  further  undergo  rigorous  imprisonment for six months.  

e) Since,  A-2  has  been  sentenced  under  Section  307  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Section  150  Railways  Act  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C., no separate sentence u/ss 326, 324, 436 I.P.C., Sec.151  Railways Act, Sec.4 Prevention of Damage of Public Property  Act, all r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C. is awarded.  

539. Accused A-3 Dr. Habib Ahmed Khan, A-5 Mohammed  Afaq  Khan,  A-10  Mohammed  Nissaruddin  @  Mujju,  A-16  Aore  Rehmat  Ansari  @  Kari,  are  guilty  of  the  offences  punishable u/s 120-B I.P.C., Sec. 3(2) (1) TADA Act r/w Sec.  120-B I.P.C.,  Sec. 3(2) (ii)  TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.3(3) TADA Act,  Sec.5 TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.6(1)  TADA  Act  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.302  r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec. 307 r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.326 r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.324 r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.436 r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.3 Explosive Substances Act r/w Sec.120- B I.P.C., Sec.4 Explosive Substances Act, Sec.9-B Explosives  Act,  Sec.150  Railways  Act  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.151  Railways  Act  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.4  Prevention  of  Damage of Public Property Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.:

Page 31

31

a) Under Section 120-B I.P.C., Sec. 3(2) (i) TADA Act R/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C. Sec. 3(3) TADA Act, Sec. 302 r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C. Sec.3(3) TADA Act, Sec.302 r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C. each  of the above accused are sentenced to life imprisonment and a  fine of Rs.5000/- on each count. In default of payment of fine  each of them shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for  one year.  

b) Under  Section 150 Railways Act  r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.  each of the above accused are sentenced to life imprisonment.  

c) Under Section 3(2) (i) TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.5 TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.6(1) TADA Act,  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.307  I.P.C.  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.3 Explosive Substances  Act,  r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.4  Explosive  Substances  Act,  each  of  the  above  accused  are  sentenced  to  ten  years  rigorous  imprisonment  and  a  fine  of  Rs.2500/- on each count. In default of payment of fine each of  them  shall  further  undergo  rigorous  imprisonment  for  six  months.  

d) Under Section 9-B Explosives Act, each of the accused  are sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of  Rs.2500/-.  In  default  of  payment  of  fine  each  of  them shall  further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.  

e) Since, each of the above accused have been sentenced u/s  307 r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.150 Railways Act r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C., no separate sentence u/s 326, 324, 436 I.P.C., Section  151 Railways Act, all r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C. is awarded.  

540. Accused  A-4  N.  Jamal  Alvi  is  guilty  of  the  offences  punishable  u/s  120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.  3(2)  (i)  TADA  Act  r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.3(2) (ii), 3(3) TADA Act, Sec.5 TADA  Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.6(1) TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C., Sec.302 r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sections 307, 326, 324,  436  I.P.C.,  Sections  3,4  Explosive  Substances  Act,  Sec.9-B  Explosive  Act,  Sections  150,  151  Railways  Act,  Sec.4  Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Sec.25(1-B) (a)  Arms Act.

Page 32

32

a) Under Section 120-B I.P.C. Sec.3(2) (i) TADA Act r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec. 3(3) TADA Act, Sec.302 r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  A-4  is  sentenced  to  life  imprisonment  and  fine  of  Rs.5000/- on each count. In default of payment of fine A-4 shall  further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.  

b) Under Section 150 Railways Act A-4 is sentenced to life  imprisonment.  

c) Under Section 3(2) (ii) TADA Act, Sec.5 TADA Act r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.6(1)  TADA Act  r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.307  I.P.C.,  Sec.3,4  Explosive  Substances  Act,  A-4  is  sentenced  to  ten  years  rigorous  imprisonment  and  a  fine  of  Rs.2500/- on each count. In default of payment of fine A-4 shall  further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.  

d) Under Section 9-B Explosives Act, A-4 is sentenced to  two years  rigorous imprisonment and a fine of  Rs.2500/-.  In  default of payment of fine A-4 shall further undergo rigorous  imprisonment for six months.  

e) Since A-4 has been sentenced under Section 307 I.P.C.,  Sec.150 Railways Act, no separate sentence u/Ss 326, 324, 436  I.P.C., Sec.151 Railways Act, Sec.4 Prevention of Damage of  Public Property Act, is awarded.  

f) Under Section 25 (1-B) (a) Arms Act, A-4 is sentenced to  three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2500/-. In  default of payment of fine A-4 shall further undergo rigorous  imprisonment for six months.  

541. Accused  A-7  Fazlur  Rehman  Sufi  @  Shamim,  A-14  Mohammed Amin are guilty of the offences punishable u/s 120- B I.P.C., Sec.3(2) (i) TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C. Sec.3(2)  (ii),  3(3),  5,6  (1)  TADA  Act,  Sec.302  r/w  120-B  I.P.C.,  Sections  307,  326,  324,  436  I.P.C.  Sections  3,4  Explosive  Substances Act, Sec.9-B Explosive Act, Sec.9-B Explosive Act,  Sections 150, 151 Railways Act, Sec.4 Prevention of Damage  of Public Property Act.

Page 33

33

a) Under Section 120-B I.P.C., Sec.3(2) (i) TADA Act r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.3(3)  TADA  Act,  Sec.302  I.P.C.  r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C. each of the above accused are sentenced to  life  imprisonment  and a  fine of  Rs.5000/-  on each count.  In  default of payment of fine each of them shall further undergo  rigorous imprisonment for one year.  

b) Under  Section  150  Railways  Act,  each  of  the  above  accused are sentenced to life imprisonment.  

c) Under Section 3(2) (ii)  TADA Act, Sec.5,6 (1) TADA  Act Sec.307 I.P.C., Sec.3,4 Explosives Substances Act, each of  the  above  accused  are  sentenced  to  ten  years  rigorous  imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2500/- on each count. In default  of payment of fine each of them shall further undergo rigorous  imprisonment for six months.  

d) Under Section 9-B Explosives Act, each of the accused  are sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of  Rs.2500/-.  In  default  of  payment  of  fine  each  of  them shall  further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.

e) Since, each of the above accused have been sentenced u/s  307, Sec.150 Railways Act no separate sentence u/s 326, 324,  436  I.P.C.,  Section  151  Railways  Act,  Sec.4  Prevention  of  Damage to Public Property act is awarded.  

542. Accused A-8 Mohammed Saleem Ansari is guilty of the  offences publishable u/s 120-B I.P.C., Sec.3(2) (1) TADA Act  r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.3(2) (ii) TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.3(3) TADA Act, Sec.5 TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C., Sec.6 (1) TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.302 r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.307 r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.326 r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.324 r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.436 r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.3 Explosive Substances Act r/w Sec.120- B I.P.C., Sec.4 Explosive Substances Act, r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.9-B Explosive Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.150 Railways  Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.151 Railways Act r/w Sec.120-B

Page 34

34

I.P.C., Sec. Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C.

a) Under Section 120-B I.P.C., Sec. 3(2) (i) TADA Act r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.3(3) TADA Act, Sec.302 r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C, Under Section 120-B I.P.C., Sec.3(2) (i) TADA Act r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.3(3) TADA Act, Sec.302 r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  A-4  is  sentenced  to  life  imprisonment  and  fine  of  Rs.5000/- on each count. In default of payment of fine A-4 shall  further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.  

b) Under Section 150 Railways Act A-4 is sentenced to life  imprisonment, A-8 is sentenced to life imprisonment and fine  of Rs.5000/- on each count. In default of payment of fine A-8  shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

c) Under Section 150 Railways Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C. A- 8 is sentenced to life imprisonment.  

d) Under Section 3(2) (ii) TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.5 TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.6(1) TADA Act,  r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.307 I.P.C. r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.  3  Explosive  Substances  Act,  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.4  Explosive  Substances  Act,  A-8  is  sentenced  to  ten  years  rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2500/- on each count.  In default of payment of fine A-8 shall further undergo rigorous  imprisonment for six months.  

e) Under Section 9-B Explosive Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C,  A-8 is sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine  of Rs.2500/-.  In default  of payment of fine A-8 shall  further  undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.  

f) Since  A-8  has  been  sentenced  under  Section  307  r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.150 Railways Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  no  separate  sentence  u/Ss  326,  324,  436  I.P.C.  Sec.151  Railways Act, Sec.4 Prevention of Damage to Public Property  Act, all r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C. is awarded.

Page 35

35

543. Accused A-15 Mohammed Aizaz akbar is guilty of the  offences punishable u/s Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.3(2) (I) TADA  Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.3(2) (ii) TADA r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C, Sec.3(3) TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.5 TADA  Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.6(1) TADA Act r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.302  r/w Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.307,  Sec.  326  r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.324 r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.436 r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.3 Explosive Substances Act r/w Sec.120- B I.P.C., Sec.4 Explosive Substances Act, Sec.9-B Explosives  Act  Sec.  150  Railways  Act  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.151  Railways  Act  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.,  Sec.4  Prevention  of  Damage to Public Property Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C..

a) Under Section 120-B I.P.C., Sec.3(2) (i) TADA Act r/w  Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.3(3) TADA Act,  r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Sec.302,  r/w  Sec.120-B  I.P.C.  A-15  is  sentenced  to  life  imprisonment and fine of Rs.5000/- on each count. In default of  payment  of  fine  A-15  shall  further  undergo  rigorous  imprisonment for one year.  

b) Under Section 150 Railways Act r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C. A- 15 is sentenced to life imprisonment.  

c)  Under  Section  3(2)  (ii)  TADA Act  r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  Section 5 TADA Act, r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C, 6(1) TADA Act,  r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Sec.307, Sec.3 Explosive Substances Act,  r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C., Section 4 Explosive Substances Act, A- 15 is sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of  Rs.2500/- on each count.  In default of payment of fine A-15  shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.  

d) Under Section 9-B Explosives Act A-15 is sentenced to  two years  rigorous imprisonment and a fine of  Rs.2500/-.  In  default of payment of fine A-15 shall further undergo rigorous  imprisonment for six months.  

e) Since, A-15 has been sentenced under Section 307 I.P.C.,  Section  150 Railways  Act  r/w Sec.120-B I.P.C.,  no separate  sentence u/ss 326, 324, 436, I.P.C. Sec.151 Railways Act, Sec.4

Page 36

36

Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, all r/w Sec.120- B I.P.C. is awarded.”    

38. Cases of accused Nos. 6 and 12 having been separated, this appeal on  

behalf of remaining 14 accused takes exception to the aforesaid judgment of  

conviction and sentence passed by the Designated Court.   Mr.  Ratnakar  

Dash,  Learned Senior  Advocate,  appeared for  A1 Dr.  Jalees  Ansari,  A4  

Jamal Alvi, A5 Afaque Khan, A7 Fazlur-Rehman, A8 Saleem Ansari, A14  

Mohd Amin and A16 Abre Rehmat Ansari.  Mr. R.S. Sodhi, Learned Senior  

Advocate appeared on behalf of A2 Ashfaque Khan.  Mr. Sanjay Hegde,  

Learned Senior Advocate appeared for A3 Habib Ahmed Khan.  Ms. Nitya  

Ramkrishnan,  learned  Advocate  appeared  on  behalf  of  A9  Md.  

Zaheeruddin, A10 Md. Nisaruddin, A11 Md. Shamsuddin, A13 Md. Yusuf  

and A15 Aizaz Akbar.  Mr. P.K. Dey, Learned Advocate for CBI.  We are  

grateful for the assistance rendered by learned counsel.

39. The submissions advanced on behalf of the accused can be broadly  

put under following five points:-

A. There was no valid invocation of provisions of TADA Act as  

required under Section 20 A (1) of TADA Act.  The documents/orders  

of  invocation  as  alleged  in  the  present  matter  were  not  

contemporaneous but fabricated later in point of time.

Page 37

37

B. The prosecution was seeking to rely upon confessions of the  

accused recorded in other crime(s).  Though permissible in law, such  

reliance was not in conformity with the principles laid down by this  

Court.  

C. Confessions recorded in the present matter were not voluntary.  

They were extracted while the accused were in police custody and in  

most cases the confessions were recorded by PW 62 H.C. Singh while  

other competent Officers were available.

D. In  any  case,  such  confessions  could  not  be  relied  upon  as  

substantive evidence to bring home the charge against the confessing  

accused and for that matter against the co-accused.  

E. There was no evidence independent or otherwise which could  

support the case of prosecution.  Further,  there was no material on  

record even to lend support or corroboration to the confessions relied  

upon by the prosecution.  

40. Since the validity of confessions recorded in the present case is quite  

crucial  in  the  present  case,  the  following  chart  would  facilitate  the  

assessment  of  issues  involved  in  the  matter.   The  chart  indicates  that  

confessions of A1, A5, A8, A9, A10 and A13 were recorded in crimes other  

than the present ones.  We have not dealt with confessions of A6 and A12.

Page 38

38

Acc- used  No

Name  of  accused

Confession  recorded  in  Case No.

Exhibit No. &  Date  of  recording

Recorded  by

A-2 Ashfaque  Khan

RC 37(S)/93, CBI, Jaipur Ex P-248 28&29/01/1994

By PW 62 H.C. Singh

A-5 Afaque Khan Case  No  46/94,  P.S.  Malviya  Nagar, New Delhi

Ex P-241A 02/02/1994

By  PW  61  Prabhat  Singh   

A-1 Mohd  Jalees  Ansari

RC 1(S)/93, Bombay Bomb blast  case

Ex P-250 6&7/2/94

By PW 62 H.C. Singh

A-3 Habib  Ahmed  Khan

RC 43-44(S)/93 CBI, Lucknow Ex P-251 12&13/02/1994

By PW 62 H.C. Singh

A-11 Md.  Shamsuddin

Crime  No.  336/93,  Abid  Road  Police Station, Hyderabad

Ex P-427-28 16/02/1994

By PW 103 K.M. Reddy

A-13 Md. Yusuf Crime  No.  336/93,  Abid  Road  Police Station, Hyderabad

Ex P-431-32 16/2/1994

By PW 103 K.M. Reddy

A-4 M. Jamal Alvi RC 43-44(S)/93 CBI, Lucknow Ex P-253 17&18/02/1994

By PW 62 H.C. Singh

A-8 Saleem Ansari Case  Crime  No.  151/93,  CCS,  Hyderabad

Ex P-444 08/03/1994

By PW 109 K.V. Reddy

A-10 Md.  Nisaruddin

Crime  No.  336/93,  Abid  Road  Police Station Hyderabad

Ex P-445 08/03/1994

By PW 109 K.V. Reddy

A-9 Md.  Zaheeruddin

Crime  No  336/93,  Abid  Road  Police Station Hyderabad

Ex P-434-35 01/07/1994

By PW 105 Rajeev  Trivedi

A-7 Fazlur- Rehman

RC 37(S)/93, CBI, Jaipur Ex P-255 26&27/071994

By PW 62 H.C. Singh

A-14 Mohd Amin RC 37(S)/93, CBI, Jaipur Ex P-257 17&18/11/1994

By PW 62 H.C. Singh

A-15 Aizaz Akbar RC 37(S)/93, CBI, Jaipur Ex P-1 1&2/6/97

By PW 1 O.P.  Chhatwal

A-16 Abre  Rehmat  Ansari

RC 37(S)/93, CBI, Jaipur Ex P-4 1&2/01/1998

By PW 1 O.P.  Chhatwal

Page 39

39

41. Section 20A was brought on the Statute by way of amendment vide  

Act 43 of 1993.  Section 20A is as under :-

“Section 20-A. Cognizance of offence . - (1) Notwithstanding,  anything  contained  in  the  Code,  no  information  about  the  commission of an offence under this Act shall be recorded by  the  police  without  the  prior  approval  of  the  District  Superintendent of Police.

(2) No court shall take cognizance of any offence under this Act  without  the  previous  sanction  of  the  Inspector-General  of  Police, or as the case may be, the Commissioner of  Police.”

42. According  to  sub-Section  (1),  there  must  be  prior  approval  of  the  

District  Superintendent  of  Police  before  any  information  about  the  

commission of offence under TADA Act could be recorded by the police.  

This provision has been construed by this Hon’ble Court to be mandatory  

and  going  by  the  negative  language  employed  therein  -  an  absolute  

imperative, in the absence of which further proceedings taken under TADA  

Act have been held to be completely invalid and of no consequence.  This  

Court  in  Hitendra  Vishnu  Thakur v.  State  of  Maharashtra3 stated  as  

under:-

“12. Of late, we have come across some cases where the  Designated Courts have charge-sheeted and/or convicted  an accused person under TADA even though there is not  even an iota of evidence from which it could be inferred,  

3 (1994) 4 SCC 602

Page 40

40

even prima facie,  let  alone conclusively,  that  the crime  was committed with the intention as contemplated by the  provisions  of  TADA,  merely  on  the  statement  of  the  investigating agency to the effect that the consequence of  the criminal act resulted in causing panic or terror in the  society or in a section thereof. Such orders result in the  misuse  of  TADA.  Parliament,  through Section  20-A of  TADA has  clearly  manifested  its  intention  to  treat  the  offences  under  TADA  seriously  inasmuch  as  under  Section  20-A(1),  notwithstanding  anything contained  in  the Code of Criminal Procedure, no information about the  commission  of  an  offence  under  TADA  shall  even  be  recorded  without  the  prior  approval  of  the  District  Superintendent of Police and under Section 20-A(2), no  court shall take cognizance of any offence under TADA  without the previous sanction of the authorities prescribed  therein. Section 20-A was thus introduced in the Act with  a view to prevent the abuse of the provisions of TADA.”

(emphasis in original)

43.  In Rangku Dutta v. State of Assam4, this Court found the requirement  

of  prior  approval  under  Section  20-A(1)  to  be  mandatory  in  following  

words:-   

18. It  is  obvious  that  Section  20-A(1)  is  a  mandatory  requirement of law. First, it starts with an overriding clause and,  thereafter,  to  emphasise  its  mandatory  nature,  it  uses  the  expression  “No”  after  the  overriding  clause.  Whenever  the  intent of a statute is mandatory, it is clothed with a negative  command. Reference in this connection can be made to  G.P.  Singh’s Principles of Statutory Interpretation, 12th Edn., at pp.  404-05, the learned author has stated:

4 (2011) 6 SCC 358

Page 41

41

“…  As  stated  by  CRAWFORD:  ‘Prohibitive  or  negative  words  can  rarely,  if  ever,  be  directory.  And  this  is  so  even  though the statute  provides  no penalty for  disobedience.’  As  observed  by  SUBBARAO,  J.:  ‘Negative  words  are  clearly  prohibitory and are  ordinarily  used as a legislative device to  make a statute imperative.’ Section 80 and Section 87-B of the  Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Section 77 of the Railways Act,  1890; Section 15 of the Bombay Rent Act, 1947; Section 213 of  the  Succession  Act,  1925;  Section  5-A of  the  Prevention  of  Corruption  Act,  1947;  Section  7  of  the  Stamp  Act,  1899;  Section 108 of the Companies Act, 1956; Section 20(1) of the  Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954; Section 55 of the  Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972; the proviso to Section 33(2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (as amended in 1956);  Section 10-A of the Medical Council Act, 1956 (as amended in  1993),  and  similar  other  provisions  have  therefore,  been  construed as mandatory.  A provision requiring ‘not less  than  three months’ notice’ is also for the same reason mandatory.”

We are in respectful agreement with the aforesaid statement of  law made by the learned author.

19. So there can be no doubt about the mandatory nature of  the requirement of this Section. Apart from that, since the said  Section has been amended in order to prevent the abuse of the  provisions of TADA, this Court while examining the question  of complying with the said provision must examine it strictly.

20. Going by the aforesaid principles, this Court finds that  no information about the commission of an offence under the  said  Act  can  be  recorded  by  the  police  without  the  prior  approval of the District Superintendent of Police. Therefore, the  requirement of prior approval must be satisfied at the time of  recording  the  information.  If  a  subsequent  investigation  is  carried on without a proper recording of the information by the  DSP  in  terms  of  Section  20-A(1),  that  does  not  cure  the  inherent defect of recording the information without the prior  approval of the District Superintendent of Police.

Page 42

42

44. In Ashrafkhan v. State of Gujarat5, the effect of non-compliance of  

Section 20 A(1) of TADA Act was considered by this Court.  This Court  

also  dealt  with  submission  advanced  on  behalf  of  the  State  that  once  

cognizance was taken and the Designated Court had decided to try the case  

by itself, any prior defects would be rendered irrelevant.  This Court stated  

in clear terms that even if the case is tried by the Designated Court, the non-

compliance of Section 20 A(1) can be raised as a ground and it would not  

prevent the accused to challenge the trial or their conviction on that ground.  

Paragraph  38  of  the  judgment  of  this  Court  is  relevant  and  is  quoted  

hereunder:-

38. As  regards  submission  of  the  State  that  the  Designated  Court having taken cognizance and decided to try the case by  itself in exercise of the power under Section 18 of TADA, the  prior  defects,  if  any,  are  rendered  irrelevant  and  cannot  be  raised, has only been noted to be rejected. Section 18 of TADA  confers  jurisdiction on the Designated  Court  to transfer  such  cases  for  the  trial  of  such  offences  in  which  it  has  no  jurisdiction to try and in such cases, the court to which the case  is transferred, may proceed with the trial of the offence as if it  had  taken  cognizance  of  the  offence.  The  power  of  the  Designated Court to transfer the case to be tried by a court of  competent  jurisdiction  would  not  mean  that  in  case  the  Designated  Court  has  decided  to  proceed  with  the  trial,  any  defect  in  trial,  cannot  be  agitated  at  later  stage.  Many  ingredients  which  are  required  to  be  established  to  confer  jurisdiction on a Designated Court  are required to be proved  during trial. At the stage of Section 18 the Designated Court has  

5 (2012) 11 SCC 606

Page 43

43

to decide as to whether to try the case itself or transfer the case  for trial to another court of competent jurisdiction. For that, the  materials collected during the course of investigation have only  to be seen. The investigating agency, in the present case, has  come  out  with  a  case  that  prior  approval  was  given  for  registration of the case and the allegations made do constitute  an offence under TADA. In the face of it, the Designated Court  had  no  option  than  to  proceed  with  the  trial.  However,  the  decision by the Designated Court to proceed with the trial shall  not prevent the accused to contend in future that they cannot be  validly prosecuted under TADA. We hasten to add that even in  a case which is not fit to be tried by the Designated Court but it  decides to do the same instead of referring the case to be tried  by  a  court  of  competent  jurisdiction,  it  will  not  prevent  the  accused to challenge the trial or conviction later on.

45. Further, this Court in Ashrafkhan (supra) went on to consider whether  

confession so recorded could be used,  for  establishing guilt  in respect  of  

offences under other enactments in following words:-

41. We have held the conviction of the accused to have been  vitiated on account of non-compliance with Section 20-A(1) of  TADA and thus, it may be permissible in law to maintain the  conviction under the Arms Act and the Explosive Substances  Act  but  that  shall  only  be  possible  when  there  are  legally  admissible evidence to establish those charges. The Designated  Court has only relied on the confessions recorded under TADA  to convict the accused for offences under the Arms Act and the  Explosive  Substances  Act.  In  view of  our  finding  that  their  conviction  is  vitiated  on  account  of  non-compliance  of  the  mandatory requirement of prior approval under Section 20-A(1)  of TADA, the confessions recorded cannot be looked into to  establish  the  guilt  under  the  aforesaid  Acts.  Hence,  the  conviction of the accused under Sections 7 and 25(1-A) of the  Arms Act and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Explosive Substances  Act cannot also be allowed to stand.

Page 44

44

46. In  the  light  of  the  aforesaid  principles,  the  effect  of  order  dated  

21.05.1996  of  Metropolitan  Sessions  Judge,  Hyderabad  and  Designated  

Court is required to be considered.  The Designated Court had found that  

there was no proper and valid invocation of the provisions of TADA Act  

while dealing with Sessions Case Nos. 438 of 1994, 584 of 1994, 13 of 1995  

and 14 of 1995.  Sessions Case No. 48 of 1994 arose from FIR No.336 of  

1993 in which crime, confessions of accused Nos. A9, A10, A11 and A13  

were recorded.  Though the State had preferred an appeal in this Court, on  

17.07.2001  at  the  request  of  the  State,  the  appeals  were  allowed  to  be  

withdrawn.  Consequently, the order of the Designated Court that there was  

no valid invocation of provisions of TADA Act, attained finality.  Not a  

single  witness  was  examined  in  the  present  matter  in  connection  with  

invocation of TADA Act in said crime No.336 of 1993 nor any document in  

that  behalf  was  placed on record.   What  we have  on record is  only the  

testimony  of  those  officials  who  had  recorded  the  confessions  of  said  

accused in crime No.336 of 1993 and nothing more. In the  face of the order  

that the provisions of TADA Act were not validity and properly invoked,  

such confessions on the strength of law declared by this Court in Rangku  

Dutta and Ashrafkhan cases (Supra), must suffer the inevitable consequence.

Page 45

45

As declared by this Court, if there is no valid prior approval under TADA  

Act,  subsequent  steps  or  stages  initiated  under  TADA Act  are  rendered  

invalid.  Consequently, the confessions of Accused Nos.A9, A10, A11 and  

A13 are without any legal sanction and cannot be relied upon.  

47. We now turn to confessions of A5 Afaque Khan recorded in Case  

No.  46/94  P.S.   Malviya  Nagar,  New Delhi  and  of  A8  Saleem Ansari  

recorded in Crime No. 151/93, CCS Hyderabad.  In both these cases, the  

officers who recorded the confession namely PW61 Prabhat Singh, PW109  

K.V.  Reddy  have  undoubtedly  been  examined  to  establish  the  fact  of  

recording of confession.  However, there is nothing on record as regards  

said two crimes, not even the respective  first information reports.  Further,  

there is nothing on record to indicate what was the fate of these two cases.  

The  learned  counsel  for  CBI  could  not  point  out  anything  from record  

indicating  the  status  of  these  cases  including  whether  the  charges  were  

framed or whether respective Courts had accepted the invocation of TADA  

or  whether  the  cases  had  in  any  way  attained  finality  as  one  tried  for  

offences under TADA Act.  Apart from the Recording Officers’ testimony  

as stated above that the confessions were recorded by them, there is nothing  

on the record even to lend semblance of support that the matters had been  

taken  to  logical  culmination  in  a  trial  under  TADA  Act.     In  the

Page 46

46

circumstances, it would be extremely difficult to rely on the confessions of  

A5 Afaque Khan and A8 Saleem Ansari.   We do not therefore deem it  

appropriate to rely on the confessions of A5 and A8 as substantive pieces of  

evidence.  

48. The confession of A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari was also not  recorded in the  

present crimes but  was recorded  in Bombay Bomb Blast case.  The record  

indicates  that  the  accused  was  produced  before  the  Designated  Court,  

Bombay on 28.02.1994 when on an application moved by CBI,  he was  

discharged from Bombay Bomb Blast case.  The fact that Bombay Bomb  

Blast  case culminated in a judgment and order of  conviction which was  

sustained by this Court6 as regards some of the accused under the provisions  

of TADA Act is a fact of which judicial notice can be taken.  The counsel  

appearing for the accused did not even urge that the confession of A1 Dr.  

Jalees Ansari could not be relied upon for want of requisite approval under  

Section  20  A(1)  of  TADA Act  in  Bombay  Bomb Blast  Case  but  their  

submission was that he having been discharged from Bombay Bomb Blast  

case,  the  confession lost  any significance and that for want of valid prior  

approval under Section 20 A(1) the entire proceedings stand vitiated.    It is,  

therefore,  required  to be considered whether confession of a person validly  

6 (2013) 13 SCC1

Page 47

47

and correctly recorded under Section 15 of TADA Act but if that person is  

subsequently  discharged  in  the  very  matter  in  which  his  confession  so  

recorded, could such confession be admissible and relied upon in any other  

trial of the very same  person.

49. The provisions of Section 15 of TADA Act and whether there is any  

statutory inhibition  for  using the confession on the premise that it is not  

recorded during the investigation of the particular offence which is under  

trial,  was considered by this Court in  State of Gujarat   v. Mohd. Atiq7.  

Relying upon the principle “it is immaterial whether the information was  

supplied in connection with the same crime or a different crime” as laid  

down in  State  of  Rajasthan v. Bhoop Singh8 this  Court  in  Mohd.  Atik  

(Supra) stated as under:

“5. It  is  clear  from the above Section that  a  confessional  statement  recorded  in  accordance  with  the  requirements  contained in the Section becomes admissible in spite of the ban  contained in Section 25 of the Evidence Act or Section 162 of  the Code of Criminal Procedure. The requirements stipulated in  Section 15(1) of the TADA for admissibility of a confession  made to a police officer are (1) the confession should have been  made to a police officer not lower in rank than a Superintendent  of Police (2) it should have been recorded by the said police  officer  (3)  the  trial  should  be  against  the  maker  of  the  confession (4) such trial must be for an offence under TADA or  the Rules thereunder. If the above requirements are satisfied the  

7 (1998) 4 SCC 351 8 (1997) 10 SCC 675   

Page 48

48

confession becomes admissible in evidence and it is immaterial  whether the confession was recorded in one particular case or in  a different case.

6. When  there  is  no  statutory  inhibition  for  using  such  confession on the premise that it was not recorded during the  investigation of the particular offence which is under trial there  is no need or reason for the Court to introduce a further fetter  against the admissibility of the confessional statement. It often  happens that  a confessor  would disclose very many acts  and  events  including  different  facets  of  his  involvement  in  the  preparation  attempt  and  commission  of  crimes  including  the  acts  of  his  co-participators  therein.  But  to  expel  every  other  incriminating  disclosure  than  that  under  investigation  of  a  particular crime from the ambit of admissibility is not mandated  by any provision of law.

7. We have, therefore, absolutely no doubt that a confession, if  usable  under  Section  15  of  the  TADA,  would  not  become  unusable merely because the case is different or the crime is  different. If the confession covers that different crime it would  be a relevant item of evidence in the case in which that crime is  under trial and it would then become admissible in the case.

50. It  is  neither  contended  that  there  was  no  valid  invocation  of  the  

provisions of TADA Act in Bombay Bomb Blast case nor it is submitted  

that on the date when A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari made his confession in Bombay  

Bomb  Blast  matter  he  was  not  accused  of  having  committed  offences  

punishable under TADA Act.  Subsequent discharge of the accused at the  

instance of the prosecution under Section 169 Cr.P.C. would not in any way  

dilute or diminish the value of such confession, if it is otherwise admissible

Page 49

49

in law. In our view, therefore, merely because the confession of A1 Dr.  

Jalees  Ansari  was  recorded  in  a  different  matter  and/or  that  he  was  

discharged from that matter would not cause any inhibition for using such  

confession in the present matter, if the confession otherwise passes the test  

of  admissibility in accordance with law.

51. Unlike the confessions of accused A9 Md. Zaheeruddin, A10 Md.  

Nisaruddin, A-11 Md. Shamsuddin and A-13 Md. Yusuf which cannot even  

be  considered  for  want  of  legal  sanction  as  described  hereinabove,  the  

confession  of  A1 can certainly  be  taken into  account,  if  it  is  otherwise  

admissible in law.  At the same time the confessions of A5 Afaque Khan  

and A8 Saleem Ansari are difficult to be taken into account as substantive  

piece of evidence for want of any material as discussed hereinabove.  

52. We now turn to the issue whether the provisions of TADA Act were  

validly invoked under Section 20A (1) of TADA Act in the present matter.  

This issue will have bearing not only on the admissibility and reliability of  

the confessions of accused recorded during the investigation of the present  

matter but also as regards the conduct of  the proceedings in the present  

matter.

Page 50

50

53. Soon after the blast that occurred at about 7.05 A.M. on 06.12.1993  

at Moula Ali Railway Station in A.P. Express,   an intimation  was received  

by PW-117 P. Chandrashekar Reddy Supdt. of Police, Ranga Reddy Distt.  

from Police Control Room.  He reached the site at about 8.30A.M. and met  

Radha Krishna    S.H.O. of P.S. Malkajgari. He was appraised of the fact  

that statement of   an injured was recorded.  SHO Radha Krishna sought his  

permission to register a case under TADA Act.  PW 117 P. Chandrashekhar  

Reddy then went to Malkajgiri Police and dictated proceedings Ext. P-450  

invoking provisions of TADA Act.  The registration of the FIR itself under  

the provisions of TADA Act was thus quite prompt. The contemporaneous  

documentation shows clear invocation of the provisions of the TADA Act  

right at the inception.  In fact, when the cases were made over to CBI for  

investigation, this was the only crime which already stood registered under  

the  provisions  of  TADA  Act.   The  cross-examination  of  PW  117  P.  

Chandrashekar Reddy does not in any manner raise any doubt about the  

version coming from PW 117 P.  Chandrashekar  Reddy.   We,  therefore,  

accept  that  registration  of  crime  under  the  provisions  of  TADA Act  in  

Hyderabad  Crime  as  valid  and  proper  and  that  Ext.P-450  was  correct  

exercise of power.

Page 51

51

54.   In respect of explosions in question, initially separate crimes were  

registered and except the one concerning Hyderabad explosion, provisions  

of TADA Act were not invoked. However, after reading Report Ext.P-506  

emanating from FSL Ahmedabad and other case papers, PW-145 K.S. Nair  

found that the provisions of TADA Act were attracted and, therefore, by his  

report  dated  08.01.1994  he  sought  approval  for  addition  provisions  of  

TADA  Act.   The  report  stated  that  the  opinion  from  FSL  department  

indicated  that  explosive  devices  were  planted  and  the  facts  constituted  

offences  punishable  under  TADA  Act.   Further,  the  report  goes  on  to  

highlight  sequential  nature  of  explosions  which  had  occurred  in  five  

running  trains  simultaneously  indicating  existence  of  a  deep  rooted  

conspiracy.   However, before any action could be taken on this report, A-1  

Dr. Jalees Ansari  was arrested in connection with  Bombay Bomb Blast  

case on 12.01.1994 and his interrogation revealed his involvement in the  

blasts in the present matter. Both PW-145 K.S. Nair and PW-62 H.C. Singh  

therefore went to Mumbai.   When PW-62 H.C.  Singh reached Mumbai,  

PW-145  K.S.  Nair  who  had  already  reached  there,  disclosed  about  the  

interrogation of A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari and produced a copy of his report  

dated  08.01.1993  seeking  invocation  of  provisions  of  TADA  Act  in  

RC43(s)/93-Ahmedabad.   The endorsement at the foot of that report in the

Page 52

52

handwriting of PW-62 H.C. Singh which document was exhibited at Ext. P-

246 is valid exercise of power invoking the provisions of TADA Act.     

55. Immediately on the next date, a fax message Ext. P-247 was sent by  

H.C.  Singh to  Lucknow stating  that  disclosure  of  A1 Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  

revealed that offences were punishable under TADA Act and that Sections  

of  TADA  Act  be  invoked  in  RC43  and  44(s)/93/CBI/Lucknow.   This  

communication also disclosed the roles of A3 Dr. Habib Ahmed Khan and  

A4 M. Jamaal Alvi.   These two accused were immediately arrested and  

applications Ext. P-518 and P-521 fled for their remand clearly mention the  

provisions of  Sections 3,  4 and 5 of  TADA Act.  This contemporaneous  

material, therefore, fully establishes the invocation of provisions of TADA  

Act  and  the  existence  of  Exbs.  P-246  and  P-247.   The  record  further  

indicates  that  on  the  date  when  second  application  Ext.  P-521  was  

preferred, PW-62 H.C. Singh was present in Lucknow and had disclosed  

the result of interrogation of A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari.  The application Ext. P-

521  therefore  refers  to  all  details  and  particulars  gathered  after  such  

interrogation.   In  the  circumstances,  we have  no hesitation  to  hold  that  

orders invoking provisions of TADA Act as evident from Ext. P-246 and  

247 were perfectly valid. The contemporaneous record also fully establishes

Page 53

53

and supports this part and the submission that these approvals were brought  

about subsequently is rejected.   

56. We now deal with approval Ext.  P-160 dated 15.01.1994. Once it  

became apparent that the explosions were part of a single conspiracy and  

the role of various accused became apparent from the interrogation of A1  

Dr. Jalees Ansari, the CBI investigating Team at Jaipur was appraised of  

these  developments.   PW-34  Shankar  Surolia  therefore  invoked  the  

provisions of  TADA Act vide Ext.  P-160.  This order Ext.  P-160 again  

refers  to the disclosure coming from the interrogation of  A-1 Dr.  Jalees  

Ansari.  We do not find anything on record to doubt the correctness of said  

order Ext. P-160.  Viewed in the perspective that it was the same agency  

that  was  investigating  into  five  different  crimes  where  explosions  had  

occurred  in  identical  way,  soon  after  the  disclosure  by  one  of  the  

conspirators it was but natural for any investigating team to deduce that not  

only  were  the  acts  punishable  under  the  provisions  of  TADA  Act  

warranting invocation of TADA Act but also that these explosions were  

part of a single conspiracy.  It would be natural in the circumstances that the  

team investigating an individual case would, therefore, be appraised of the  

development.   Ext.P-246 therefore  logically  led  to  similar  invocation  in  

other cases as well.   We thus do not find any inconsistency or infirmity in

Page 54

54

the invocation of provisions of TADA Act and accept such invocation vide  

Ext. P450, P246, P247 and P160 to be correct.

57.  Having dealt with issues concerning prior approval for invocation of the  

provisions of TADA Act as well as admissibility of some of the confessions  

recorded in cases where prior approval was found to be invalid, the orders of  

sanction  issued  under  Section  20(A)  2  of  TADA  Act  must  now  be  

considered. In all there were four orders namely Ext. P 432 dated 20.08.1994  

by PW-107 K.Vijaya Rama Rao, Ext. PW- 438 dated 14.04.1995 by PW-

107 K.Vijaya Rama Rao,  Ext.  P 471 dated 25.07.1997 by PW-130 R.C.  

Sharma and Ext. P 469 dated 27.02.1998 by PW 128 Karthikeyan, who were  

Directors, CBI at the relevant time. We have gone through the testimony of  

these witnesses  and the orders  and we do not find any infirmity in their  

assessment and exercise of power. In fact these orders of sanction were not  

seriously questioned by the learned counsel appearing for the accused whose  

major emphasis was as regards prior approvals as discussed above.

58.  According to the prosecution the acts in question were part of a single  

conspiracy  which  was  planned  and  executed  in  following  stages  and  

manner:-

Page 55

55

(i) February 1993 A1, A14 and one Nisar Ahmed Ansari (absconder)  

formed a group to take revenge for demolition of Babri Masjid.

(ii) June 1993 A15 who used to meet A1, met him in June 1993 when  

A1 disclosed his intention to take revenge. A15 took his friend A9 and  

introduced him to A1.

(iii)  August 1993 A15 went to Gulbarga and informed A9 that A1  

was  reaching  Gulbarga  alongwith  A8  the  next  day.  During  their  

meeting A1 disclosed his plan to cause bomb explosions at various  

places in Hyderabad. [In execution of such plan the bomb explosions  

did occur at Humayun Nagar P.S., Abid Road P.S. and Reservation  

Centre at Secundeabad. Separate crimes including Crime No.336 of  

1993 were registered].  

(iv)  August  1993 A1  acquired  70-80  Gelatine  Sticks,  25-30  

detonators and 25meter of fuse wire from A2. A14 suggested to cause  

bomb blasts in important trains on the first anniversary of demolition  

of Babri Masjid.

(v)  Aug-Sep  1993 A4,  A  16  and  one  Mohd.  Tufail  (absconder)  

attended a meeting at Srinagar and decided to do terrorist acts in State  

of Uttar Pradesh. A16 brought arms and ammunitions from Srinagar  

to Lucknow and delivered the same to A4.

Page 56

56

(vi)  Sept 1993 A16 also brought seven bombs, a pistol and 7 hand  

grandes to Lucknow.

(vii)  End of  September 1993 In  a  meeting that  took place  at  the  

house of A4 in Lucknow which was attended by A1, A3, A6, A16 and  

others,  it was decided to cause bomb blasts on 5th and 6th December  

1993. A4 took the responsibility  to cause bomb blasts  in Rajdhani  

Express  trains  in  State  of  Uttar  Pradesh  while  A1  took  the  

responsibility to cause bomb blasts in the western and southern parts  

of the country. A1 also agreed to arrange finances for the purpose.

(viii) Oct-Nov 1993 A11 from Gulbarga came to Mumbai, met A15  

and informed that A1 had called him. The meeting took place between  

A1 and A11.

(ix) Nov 1993 A1 informed A14 regarding plans to cause bomb blasts  

in important trains on 6.12.1993 in association with Mohd. Saleem,  

Tahir and others. It was decided to cause blasts in trains in Surat and  

A14 gave Rs. 2000/- to A1.

(x)  14.11.1993 A reservation slip  was filled and signed by A1 for  

reservation  of  a  seat  from  Baroda  to  Delhi  in  Rajdhani  Express  

leaving on 5.12.1993 for A7 in fictitious name “Sameer” and for his  

return journey on 6.12.1993 in Frontier Mail from Kota to Mumbai.

Page 57

57

(xi)  19.11.1993 A1 sent sum of Rs. 3000/- in an insured cover form  

Mumbai to A3 to be handed over to A4.

(xii) 21.11.1993 At the instructions of A1, Tahir (absconder) went to  

Baroda for survey and to assess the security in Rajdhani Express. He  

stayed at Hotel Delux at Baroda.

(xiii) 24.11.1993 A3 received Rs.  3000/-  through insured envelope  

sent by and gave the money to A4 who in turn used it for purchase of  

bomb devices. A3 supplied explosives to A4.   

(xiv) End of 1993 A15 along with A9 and A11 went to the house of  

A1 who gave them bomb material and Rs.1500 in cash.

(xv) 01.12.1993 At the instance of A1 one Md. Saleem (Absconder)  

went to Surat to survey Flying Queen train by booking a seat in a  

fictitious name “Sadiq”.

(xvi) 02.12.1993 A1 booked three tickets in a bus leaving Mumbai on  

4.12.1993 to Baroda.

(xvii) 04.12.1993 As  per  instructions  of  A1,  A7  along  with  Md.  

Saleem (absconder)  met A1 at  the bus stand.  A1 handed over two  

bombs kept in a brief case and a bag to be planted in Flying Queen  

and Rajdhani Express. Thereafter A7 and Nisaar boarded the bus and  

left for Baroda. A14 also left for Baroda by train the same night.

Page 58

58

(xviii)  5  th   -6  th   December 1993   A4, A6 and one Hameed (absconder)  

went  by  bus  to  Kanpur  and stayed  in  Hindu Apna Hotel.  A4 and  

Hameed went to the station, put a bomb in Delhi Howrah Rajdhani  

Express while next morning A4, A6 and Hameed put the bomb in  

Howrah Delhi Rajdhani Express.

Around  the  same  time,  A9,  A10,  A11,  A12  andA13  went  to  

Hyderabad from Gulbarga, stayed in Deccan lodge A12 and A13 Md. Yusuf  

planted the bomb in A.P. Express, A15 planted a bomb in Bangalore Kurla  

Express at Pune.

59.   In order to prove its case, the prosecution relies on number of exhibits  

and testimony of various witnesses. Though there is no direct evidence in  

the form of version coming from any witness implicating any of the accused  

clearly as regards any of the material stages as aforesaid, according to the  

prosecution  the  confessions  of  various  accused  as  corroborated  by  

circumstantial evidence are sufficient to establish its case. Confessions are  

thus the fulcrum of the case of the prosecution which would then require  

consideration whether each of those confessions were correctly recorded in a  

manner known to law and to what extent those confessions can be relied  

upon.

Page 59

59

60.  Section 15 (1) of TADA Act expressly makes confession of an accused  

recorded by a Police Officer admissible. It is settled position in law that  

confession so recorded under Section 15 (1) of TADA Act in accordance  

with statutory requirements and conditions in Rule 15 of TADA Rules is  

admissible against the maker, co-accused, abettor or a conspirator subject to  

conditions  stipulated  in  a  Proviso  to  Section  15  (1)  of  the  Act.  The  

confession so recorded in accordance with law and guidelines is taken as  

substantive piece of evidence and can form the foundation or a basis for  

conviction  of  the  maker,  co-accused,  abettor  or  conspirator.  Though the  

confession if found to be recorded in conformity with the requirements of  

law can certainly form the basis of conviction as against the maker of such  

confession, the extent of reliability of such confession as against the co-

accused has  however   been treated  with caution.   In  State v. Nalini  &  

Others 9, Wadhwa J. made the following observations:-

“424.  In  view  of  the  above  discussions,  we  hold  the  confessions of the accused in the present case to be voluntarily  and validly made and under Section 15 of TADA confession of an  accused  is  admissible  against  a  co-accused  as  a  substantive  evidence.  Substantive  evidence,  however,  does  not  necessarily  mean  substantial  evidence.  It  is  the  quality  of  evidence  that  matters. As to what value is to be attached to a confession will fall  within the domain of  appreciation of  evidence.  As a  matter  of  prudence, the court may look for some corroboration if confession  

99. 999(5) SCC 253

Page 60

60

is to be used against a co-accused though that will again be within  the sphere of appraisal of evidence.”  

Quadri J. struck a note of caution in para 706 as under:-

“706.  It  is  also  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  evidence  of  confession of a co-accused is not required to be given on oath, nor  is it given in the presence of the accused, and its veracity cannot  be  tested  by  cross-examination.  Though  the  evidence  of  an  accomplice is free from these shortcomings yet an accomplice is a  person who having taken part in the commission of offence, to  save himself, betrayed his former associates and placed himself on  a safer plank — “a position in which he can hardly fail to have a  strong  bias  in  favour  of  the  prosecution”,  the  position  of  the  accused who has given confessional statement implicating a co- accused is that he has placed himself on the same plank and thus  he sinks or sails  along with the co-accused on the basis  of  his  confession. For these reasons, insofar as use of confession of an  accused  against  a  co-accused  is  concerned,  rule  of  prudence  cautions the judicial discretion that it cannot be relied upon unless  corroborated generally by other evidence on record.”

61.   We will now consider confessions given by the Accused (other than A6  

and A12 whose cases are separated) alongwith other material against each of  

them.  It   must  be  stated  at  this  stage  that  in  Kartar  Singh  v. State  of  

Punjab10 decided on 11.03.1994 this court had laid down certain guidelines  

in para 263 of its judgment. The confessions recorded after the date of the  

decision will have therefore to be tested whether they are in keeping with the  

guidelines.

10 1994 (3) SCC 569

Page 61

61

62. Re- A1 -- Dr. Jalees Ansari:  

It  was submitted on behalf of the accused that  this confession was  

brought about by coercion and torture and that the accused had retracted his  

confession on 21.04.1994 (vide Ext. D 154) and later on 09.01.1995 (Ext. D  

153).   It  was  further  submitted  that  the  accused  was  produced from the  

Police custody and remained in police custody even after recording of the  

confession.

The retraction dated 21.04.1994 stated that the accused was tortured,  

beaten and that his signatures were forcefully taken on empty written and  

typed sheets under threats.  The later retraction dated 09.01.1995 stated that  

he  was  forced  to  sign  on  certain  papers,  the  written  matter  was  neither  

described nor shown to him.  It is relevant that after obtaining his custody on  

28.02.1994 from Designated Court,  Bombay, A1 was produced in Ajmer  

Court on 01.03.1994. Since the Judge presiding over the Designated Court  

was on leave, he was produced before Additional Sessions Judge who gave  

him  two  days  remand.  The  accused  was  again  produced  before  the  

Designated Court on 4.03.1994 on which date he was remanded to judicial  

custody.  The proceedings dated 4.03.1994 bear the signature of A1, which  

fact is admitted by him. On none of these two dates any complaint was made  

that  either the accused was beaten or  tortured or that  his confession was

Page 62

62

obtained by exercise  of  any threat  or  coercion.   The retractions  are  also  

much  later,  the  first  being  on  21.4.1994.   Having  gone  through  the  

confession which records the satisfaction of the recording officer i.e. PW 62  

H.C.  Singh  about  the  voluntariness  of  the  confession,  the  certificate  

appended  thereto  and  the  other  material  circumstances  we  accept  the  

confession to be correctly recorded and reject the submission that it was not  

voluntarily recorded. The format of the confession is also consistent with the  

requirements of Rule 15 of TADA Rules.

62.1. Having found the confession to be correctly recorded, we now deal  

with the confession as it stands.  The relevant portions of confession Ext.P-

250 are as under:-

“It was around this time that I met one Ashfaque Khan in  the  office  of  my  brother-in-law,  Shamim Ansari  at  Ghafoor  Manzil.   This  was  in  the  last  week  of  Dec’90.   He  was  introduced  to  me  as  a  mining  contractor  from Rajasthan  by  Javed  Ansari  nephew  of  Shamim  Ansari.   At  that  time  the  atmosphere in Bombay was tense and we discussed about the  plight  of  muslims  in  the  country.   Later  one  day  I  took  Ashfaque  Khan  to  nearby  restaurant  and  enquired  from him  about the possibility of getting explosives from Rajasthan. He  said he would try and arrange some explosive material for me. I  noted down his address and telephone number and also gave  my telephone number and address. Later after about 1 to 1-1/2  months I  telephone to  him and enquired about  the explosive  materials. He told me that he has not been able to arrange the  materials. I told him to try. Later I went to Dausa on my way to  Delhi. He was still not able to arrange the material. He however  gave me 2-3 detonators which he was having. He also explained

Page 63

63

to  me the use  of  these detonators.  I  then went  to  Delhi  and  Pilkhua. On my way back I again haulted at Dausa for some  time.  When  I  gave  my  telephone  Number  and  address  to  Ashfaque I had told him that I may speak to him in the name of  Abdullah. I had told him that on telephone he should call for me  by the name Abdullah. On my way back I stayed in Dausa for  some  time  and  come  back  to  Bombay.  Later  sometime  in  June’93 I  again  telephoned to Ashfaque from Bombay.  This  time he told me that he had arranged for some material. I then  went to him after 10-12 days. Ashfaque Khan gave me about  70-80 Gelatine sticks. 25-30 detonators and some fuse wire. I  gave him about Rs. 2500/- to 3000/- for this. I had earlier given  him about Rs. 800/- during my earlier visit. In all as far as I  remember I gave him about Rs. 4000/- in all. These Gelatine  sticks were used for  the bomb blast  at  Railways Reservation  Centre,  Secunderabad,  Gamdevi Police Station Bombay,  in a  local train at Matunga Rly. Stn. And the bomb blast in trains  near  kota  (Rajdhani  Exp.),  Surat  (Flying  Queen)  and  Secunderabad/Hyderabad (A.P. Exp.) on 6.12.1993.

Sometimes in Mid’93 one Aizaz of Gulbarga, who was  working with a travel agent Tawakkal travels, became friendly  with  me.  In  short  period  I  took  him  into  confidence  and  discussed my plans with him. He took lot of interst and told me  that  some of  his  friends  in  Gulbarga  were also  interested  in  learning the use of explosives and making bombs. He went to  Gulbarga and spoke to his friends. He also introduced me to  one  Ahmed  of  Gulbarga.  Sometime  in  Aug’93,  Saleem  r/o  Madanpura and myself went to Gulbarga, where we met Aizaz,  Ahmed and  one  Azeem.  I  taught  Aizaz  and  Ahmed how to  make  bombs.  I  then  came  to  Hyderabad  with  Ahmed  and  Saleem, where I was introduced to one Shamsuddin @ Baba  painter of Gulbarga. We caused two bomb blasts at two Police  Stations in Hyderabad. I had left Hyderabad before the actual  bomb  blasts  took  place.  Later  the  bomb  blast  at  Railway  Reservation Centre was done by Shamsuddin @Baba Painter on  his own. He had taken the material from me in Bombay.

Abdul Karim had once told me that he knows one Dr.  Mohd. Habib of Rae Bareilli, who was also interested in taking

Page 64

64

up the cause  of  Muslims  and some direct  action against  the  Govt. and majority Hindu Community. Abdul Karim had stayed  in Rae Bareilli  for  some time. One Abdul Hamid s/o Hakim  Obaidullah who was working in my dispensary also told me  that  Dr.  Habib  of  Rae  Bareilli  was  his  grand  uncle  (Nana).  Sometimes in April, 93 when I was going to my village in UP I  went  to  Rae  Bareilli  from  Lucknow and  met  Dr.  Habib  on  reference of  Abdul  Karim. We discussed about  the plight  of  Muslims and the plans of causing disruptive activities which I  was having in my mind. I asked him if he could arrange for  some weapons and other materials for bombs. Dr.  Habib told  me that he would introduce me to one Jamal Alvi of Lucknow  who was also interested in such activities and can arrange for  some materials. I stayed for a night at Rae Bareilli and came to  Lucknow with Dr. Habib and met Jamal Alvi at his residence.  When Dr. Habib introduced me to Jamal Alvi he told me that he  (Jamal  Alvi)  had  earlier  met  me  at  a  library  in  Bombay.  I  however did not recollect this meeting. During our discussions  Jamal Alvi told me that he had some links with some people  and Organisations in Kashmir who can arrange supply of some  weapons. From Lucknow I went to my village and from there I  went to Nepal and met Mirza Dilshad Beg, Member of Nepal’s  Parliament and spoke to him about getting some weapons as I  had heard that he was also dealing in such items.  Beg did not  give much importance. On my return I again met Jamal Alvi at  Lucknow. During our meeting we decided to carry out some  bomb blast on 31/7/93. Jamal Alvi told me that he would do  something  on  that  day  at  Lucknow.  Later  I  came  back  to  Bombay and could not meet Alvi for a long time. During this  period I decided to postpone the date from 31/7/93. Jamal Alvi  told me that he would do something on that day at Lucknow.  Later I came back to Bombay and could not meet Alvi for a  long time. During this period I decided to postpone the date  from 31/7/93 to 13/8/93, just a few days before Independence  Day so that the bomb blast would attract more attention of the  Govt. I sent this message to Alvi at Lucknow who agreed to the  proposal.  I  proceeded with my plans and arranged for  bomb  blasts at two Police Stations in Hyderabad and Azad Maidan  Police  Station  in  Bombay  on  13/8/93.  I  also  arranged  for  a

Page 65

65

bomb blast in Bombay on 11/8/93. I had used the name “Crush  India Force” for these activities.

After this I met Jamal Alvi at Lucknow in Sept’93. I had  gone to  the  residence  of  Jamal  Alvi  with  Dr.  Habib  of  Rae  Bareilli towards the end of Sep’93. During my visit to Jamal  Alvi’s  house  a  meeting  was  held  in  which  Jamal  Alvi,  Dr.  Habib, myself and 3-4 other boys of Jamal Alvi’s group were  present. Two of these boys were Afaq and Tuffail. One Kari,  who I later came to know was from a village close to my native  village, joined us later. Jamal Alvi had told me Kari stays in  Kashmir and is a representative of Hizbul Mujahidben. During  the  meeting  the  condition  of  Muslims  particularly  after  the  demolition  of  Babri  Masjid  and  the  attitude  of  Govt.  was  discussed and it was decided that something should be done on  6/12/93 to remember the demolition of Babri Masjid one year  ago and remind the Govt. that the issue was alive. I suggested  that  we  should  cause  bomb  blasts  in  prestigious  trains  like  Rajdhani Express so that the upper class of Society which is  mostly from Hindu Community is affected. Killing or injuring  of some people in trains would terrorize the people and govt.  and attract lot of publicity also. Initially Dr. Habib and Afaq  and some others were not agreeable to his as they felt that some  innocent lives would be lost. Later, they all agreed as it was felt  that demolition of Babri Masjid was an issue on which some  lives could be sacrificed and all of us should be united on this  issue. During the meeting Jamal Alvi took the responsibility of  organizing  bomb  blasts  in  prestigious  trains  like  Rajdhani  Express in UP. I agreed to organize bomb blasts in trains in  other parts of the county. Some of those present also raised the  question  of  funds  for  purchasing  tickets  etc.  for  trains  and  materials for  making bombs.  I  then offered to contribute Rs.  3000/-  and said  that  I  would sent  the amount  from Bombay  either  to  Jamal  Alvi  or  Dr.  Habib.  After  the  meeting  Kari  showed  me one  imported  pistol  which he  had  brought  from  Kashmir. He also showed me some packets of explosives. He  had kept these in a box in Alvi’s house where some books were  kept. Later, when Kari and myself came out for tea in a nearby  hotel, he (Kari) told me that he was to go to Jaipur to carry out  some explosions in Johri Bazar and Hawa Mahal. As he was

Page 66

66

short of some funds I gave him Rs. 500/-. During this visit I  also  deposited  an  application  for  my passport,  with  a  travel  Agent. I was taken there by Afaq who has a training institute in  the same building. In the passport application I had given the  address of my native village.

After coming back to Bombay I started preparing for the  bomb blasts  to  be  carried  out  on  6.12.1993.  I  discussed  the  decision that was taken at Lucknow with Jamal Alvi and others  with my associates Shamim,Tahir, Saleem and Amin who were  agreeable to the plan. I also spoke to Aizaz who was working in  Bombay  and  through  him  called  for  Ahmed  of  Gulbarga.  I  discussed the  plan with Ahmed when he came to see me at  Bombay later. After returning back Ahmed sent Shamsuddin @  Baba Painter to see me at Bombay. I discussed the plan with  him. As he was agreeable  to the plan I  gave him one bomb  which was in unfinished condition. He took this to Gulbarga.  This  was  about  15-20  days  before  6.12.1993.  Later,  Shamsuddin  came back around 1.12.1993 and asked  for  one  more bomb, which he said he would get planted in a train at  Gulbarga through Aizaz, who had by then returned to Gulbarga.  Shamsuddin @ Baba had told me that he would plant one bomb  in A.P. Express at the same day. I gave one bomb to Shasuddin  on  2.12.1993.  He  left  on  the  same  day.  Meanwhile,  I  had  decided to plant Bombs in Rajdhani Express from Bombay to  Delhi and Flying Queen from Surat to Bombay. I had decided  that Shamim Tahirer and Saleem would plant bombs in these  trains. Saleem had gone to Surat and booked a seat for himself  in the name Sadiq on 1.12.1993 in 2nd Class of Flying Queen  Express of 6.12.1993. I had also reserved a seat for Shamim in  Pantry  car  of  Rajdhani  Express  Bombay  to  New  Delhi  on  5/12/1993. The reservation was in the name of Samir. As per  the plan Shamim was to board the train at Baroda and get down  at Kota, after putting on the timer device of the bomb. He was  to return back from Kota Frontier Mail on 6.2.1993 itself. For  this  I  had  purchased  a  return  journey  ticket  from  Kota  to  Bombay in first  class  in  the name of Samir.  The money for  these tickets was paid by me. Tahir was to accompany Shamim  and Saleem as a helping hand upto Baroda. As per plan I had  also booked three tickets in a bus from Bombay to Baroda on

Page 67

67

4.12.1993. According to the plan Shamim, Tahir and Saleem  left Bombay by bus. I gave them two bombs, one for Rajdhani  Express and one for Flying Queen Exp. One bomb was in a Air  Bag and the other  in  a  Alfa  Brief  case.  On 4.12.1993 when  these persons were to leave Saleem felt that there should be one  more  person  for  his  help.  As  Amin  was  keen  to  go  it  was  decided  that  he  would  assist  Saleem.  As  there  was  no  reservation for him in bus he left for Baroda by train. All the  four persons were to meet at a hotel in Baroda. Tahir had earlier  gone  to  Baroda  some  days  earlier  to  assess  the  security  in  Rajdhani  Express.  He had  then  selected  a  hotel  where  these  persons were to stay.

As per the plan Shamim boarded the Rajdhani Express at  Baroda with the bomb. Tahirer returned back after seeing off  Shamim. Saleem and Amin travelled upto Surat, Where Saleem  planted  the  bomb in  the  train  at  Surat  Station.  Later  ,  both  Saleem and Amin came back to Bombay, Shamim came back to  Bombay a day later. I remained at Bombay on 6/12/1993. After  returning  back  Shamim,  Tahir  and  Amin  reported  the  developments to me. I enquired from them whether they were  all right.

During this period I did not know as to how Jamal Alvi  had planned for the bomb blast in UP. I only heard the news  through the media. After coming back from Lucknow I had sent  Rs.3000/- by post to Dr. Habib for passing on the amount to  Jamal  Alvi  at  Lucknow  for  the  bomb  blast  proposed  for  6/12/1993 during the meeting at Lucknow in Sept’93. I had sent  the amount sometimes in mid Nov’93 but I had not received  any  information  about  their  exact  plan.  Around  10/12/1993,  Jamal  Alvi,  came to my house at  Bombay and informed me  about the bomb blasts in Rajdhani Express trains done by him. I  enquired from him whether the blasts were not powerful as no  persons  had  been  killed.  Later,  Shamsuddin  and  Azim  also  came to Bombay. They told me the bomb in A.P. Express was  planted by Azim as Shamsuddin was not well that day. They  also told me that Aizaz had kept one bomb in Bangalore-Kurla  Express which did not explode. Later, I came to know that his  bomb had been thrown out from the train by passenger.

Page 68

68

….Sometimes  in  early  December  before  the  bomb  blast  in  trains on 6/12/93 Abdul Karim had also come to Bombay,  I  disclosed my plans for 6/12/93, he then told me that we should  do  something  at  Delhi  on  26/1/94,  so  that  some  important  persons could be killed for creating terror.  I agreed to this and  told him that I would do something.  Later I got preoccupied  with my plans for 15/1/94 and did not give much thought for  preparing any plan for 26/1/94.

I was arrested by CBI on 13/1/1994. Few days before my arrest  I  had  given  on  bag  containing  some  arms-revolvers,  Kattas,  cartridges  etc.  to  my younger  brother  Laeeq  Ansari  for  safe  custody. The remaining arms explosives out of the lot, which I  had procured from time to time were in my residence and were  seized by CBI.”

62.2. The aforesaid confession Ext.P-250 deals with and throws light as  

regards all  stages  of  the conspiracy as projected by the Prosecution.   It  

further  shows  the  involvement  and  the  important  role  played  by  this  

accused at every stage.  He was the mastermind and main architect of the  

conspiracy.   The  confession  refers  to  three  circumstances  in  respect  of  

which material is available on record. (1) Amount of Rs.3,000/-  sent by A1  

to A3 (2) Application for passport made by A1 and (3) Reservation made  

by him in the name of Sameer in Rajdhani Express.  

62.3 The  insured  envelope  in  which  amount  of  Rs.3,000/-   sent   was  

brought on record at Ext. P-230 which bears No.0540 and was sent by “Dr.  

Mohd. Jalees BTT Chawl” addressed to “Dr. Habib, Kaharonka Adda, Rae

Page 69

69

Bareily” and bears stamp of “HANSROAD P.O.” with date 19.11.1993.  

PW  55   A.L.  Lad,  Postal  Assistant,  Hans  Road  Post  Office  Byculla,  

Mumbai was examined to prove Ext. P-230 and the fact that insured parcel  

of the value of Rs.3,000/- was sent to Dr. Habib, as aforestated.  Ext.P-172  

is  a document from Rae Bareili  Post  Office with endorsement  in Hindi,  

which according to prosecution was in the hand-writing of A 3 Dr. Habib,  

to the following effect:

“Ek  Kita  No.540  Kimti  3,000/-  (Teen  Hajaar)  ka  seal  band Durust Paya.”

 Sd/- Dr. Habib

PW 37 Ganga Narayan, Post Man at Head Office, Rae Bareili stated  

that he had made endorsement at Ext.P-172 after the writing and Signature  

of A3 Dr. Habib and that the writing and the signature were put by A3 in  

front of him.  PW38 Swami Dayal, who at the relevant time was working as  

clerk in the Post Office at Rae Bareili also stated that the writing and the  

signature of A3 as well as the attestation by PW37 Ganga Narayan was done  

in his presence.   

62.4 Application for Passport made by A1 is on record vide Ext.P-187 with  

the photograph and signatures of A1.  The prosecution has also placed on  

record  the  receipt  dated  28.09.1993  acknowledging  receipt  of  Rs.3,000/-

Page 70

70

issued by Passport Office Lucknow which is at Ext.P187.  PW41 Tahir Raza  

Abdi, Travel Agent has stated that A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari had come to him  

around on 27.09.1993 with A5 Afaque Khan with a request  to make his  

passport.  The witness further stated that he had obtained signatures of A1  

on the photograph and on the application.  Relevant documentation namely,  

the entries  in his register at  Ext.P-189 with entry regarding A1 was also  

placed on record.   His brother PW42 Sikandar Mirza proved the relevant  

entries in the register and the fact that he had deposited fee of Rs.300 in the  

Passport Office on 28.09.1993.  The fact that A1 was in Lucknow around  

28.09.1993 thus stands established.

62.5 The prosecution has examined PW16 Smt. Vijaya Dev Prakash who  

was working as Enquiry-cum-Reservation Clerk at Bombay Central Railway  

Station at the relevant time.  The witness stated that she had issued ticket in  

the name of “Sameer” on the basis  of Reservation Slip Ext.P-59 and the  

passenger was allotted Seat No.1 in Compartment PC-2.

62.6 The opinion of the hand writing expert at Ext.P-290 and the testimony  

of PW133 Dr. S.C. Mittal, hand-writing expert further establishes that the  

writings in question on insured envelope Ext. P230, Passport Receipt Ext.P-

187 and Reservation Slip Ext.P-159 were in the hand-writing of A1.

Page 71

71

62.7 Further, visiting card Ext.P-159 was recovered from the house of A2  

Ashfaque Khan at Dausa vide Seizure Memo Ext.P-158 which seizure was  

proved through PW32 R.D.  Kalia,  Inspector,  CBI,  Jaipur.   Visiting Card  

Ext.P-159 of Dr. Jalees Ansari bears telephone No. “3055704” against “Dr.  

Abdullah”. Both these writings have been found by PW-133 hand-writing  

expert to be of A1.

These circumstances through documentary evidence on record  stand  

proved and lend  sufficient corroboration to the contents of  confession Ext.  

P-250. On the strength of his confession and the corroborating material, the  

case of the Prosecution stands fully established against A1.

63.  Re: A-2  Ashfaque Khan   

A2 was arrested on 16.04.1994 and the arrest memo Ext.P-161 shows  

that  the  offence  was  one  under  the  provisions  of  TADA  Act.   He  was  

produced  on  17.01.1994  and  remanded  to  police  custody.   After  his  

confession was recorded on 28th and 29th January, 1994 vide Ext.P-248, he  

was  produced  on  09.02.1994  and  remanded  to  judicial  custody.   No  

objection was taken nor any complaint was made when he was produced  

before the judicial officer on 09.02.1994 or soon thereafter while he was in  

judicial custody.  His retraction Ext.D-159 is dated 20.08.1995 nearly one

Page 72

72

and a half year later and states that his signatures were obtained on blank  

papers  after  he  was  badly  tortured  and  that  he  had  never  given  any  

confessional statement.  Considering the fact no complaint was made on the  

day he was produced and the retraction for the first time was done nearly  

one and half year later, we reject the submission that the confession was  

brought about by torture or coercion.  We have gone through the confession  

and the certificate appended thereto and the examination of PW62 and find  

that the confession is completely in conformity with the requirement of law.  

We therefore consider the confession Ext.248 to be admissible and reliable.

63.1 The confession Ext.P-248 states inter-alia:

“Dr. Jalees Ansari had enquired about the materials used  in mines for the blasting purpose and asked that he needed the  explosives  used for blasting.   He asked me whether I could  arrange for the same.  I told him that sending the materials was  quite difficult.  Dr. Jalees Ansari told that even than try to get  it .  He told me that he, often visited Delhi and will meet me in  Dausa.   He  had  taken  my  address  and  telephone  number.  20803.  Jalees  Ansari  also gave me his  card,  which has just  been shown to me.  He has written the word “ABDULLAH’ in  the  card  and  stated  that  he  will  call  over  phone  by  name  Abdullah.  So understand that it was his phone call.

In Bombay when Dr. Jalees Ansari talked about religion  and  stated  that  “Islam is  in  Danger”  then  I  came under  his  influence and agreed to collect the explosive materials.  When I  asked him what he will do of it, he told that do not bother about  it.  There was a talk with Dr. Jalees Ansari in the restaurant and  thereafter 2-3 days I came back to Dausa.”

Page 73

73

“On my reaching Dausa, often about 1 to 1-1/2 month  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  called me to Dausa  at  my residence over  telephone. He enquired about the explosive material.  I told  him that so far it could not be arranged.  He told me to try to get  the same and stated that he will be coming to Dausa after a few  days.  After 15-20 days Dr. Jalees Ansari came to me in Dausa.  After  coming  to  Dausa  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  asked  me  about  explosives materials.   I  told him that so far it  co7uld not be  arranged.  Then he asked about SAMAAN and asked me to  show it.  At that time I was having 2-3 blank damaged TOPI, I  showed the same to Dr. Ansari.  I told him hot to use the TOPI  (detonators).   These  blank  TOPIs  were  taken  away  by  Dr.  Jalees Ansari.  He gave me approx. Rs.800/- and told that I may  continue efforts for the materials.  He will again ring me and  meet me if he came there.

Dr. Jalees Ansari stayed at my residence for about one  night and one day.  He had asked not to introduce him to any  one.  Dr. Jalees Ansari went to Delhi from there.  After 1-2  days,  while  returning  from Delhi  he  again  stayed  at  Dausa.  After staying for the night at Dausa he went to Bombay from  Jaipur. Again Dr. Jalees was talking about the communal riots  held  in  Bombay  while  he  was  in  Dausa  and  instigated  my  feelings.   Due  to  this  I  decided  to  give  him  the  explosive  materials.”

…………………

“I  took  the  above  materials  and  after  some  days,  a  telephone call  of  Dr. Jalees Ansari  came from Bombay.  He  asked me about the explosive materials.   I  told him that  the  material had been arranged.  Dr. Jalees Ansari told that after  some days he would be coming to Dausa.  After 10-12 days Dr.  Jalees Ansari came to dausa.

……I gave materials to him which I had bought from village  Guddu Chadar.  He was having some money in his pocket and  gave to me.  He told that it was Rs.4000/- including the money  which he had given earlier.”

..………………..

Page 74

74

“Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  instigated  my  religious  feelings  by  talking about religion. He used to speak ill of Hindus, that is  why I  come under  his  influence.  Due to  this  I  collected  the  explosive materials and gave him. I was knowing from his talks  that he was collecting these materials for making bomb etc. and  will  utilize  it  for  illegal  purpose  but  I  came  under  his  influence.”

63.2 During the search of the house of A2 a visiting card Ext.P-159 and a  

diary were recovered vide Seizure Memo Ext. P-159.  The seizure memo  

was proved by PW-32 Inspector R.D. Kalia.  The Diary Ext.P-157 bears the  

name and telephone number of “Abdullah”.  According to the hand writing  

expert’s opinion Ext.P-290 and the testimony of PW-133 Dr.  S.C. Mittal  

Hand  Writing  Expert  this  writing  in  Diary  Ext.  P-157  was  in  the  hand  

writing of A2 Ashfaque Khan.   

63.3 The recovery of visiting card Ext.P-159 which was found to be having  

writing of A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari as stated hereinabove and the Diary Ext.P-

157 lend sufficient corroboration to the statements made in the confession  

Ext.P-248.    The  confession  of  A2  stands  fully  corroborated  by  

circumstances on record and by the confession of A1and the case against  

him stands fully established.

Page 75

75

64. Re: A-3  Dr. Habib Ahmed Khan

Ext.  247  Fax  message  had  named  A3  who  was  then  arrested  on  

14.01.1994 from Rai Bareili and produced before the Judicial Magistrate of  

Lucknow.  As directed by the Judicial Magistrate,  he was then produced  

before TADA Court on 17.01.1994 which by its orders dated 17.01.1994 and  

22.01.1994 remanded him to police custody. While in custody he was taken  

to Delhi where his confession Ext. P-251 was recorded on 12.02.1994 and  

13.02.1994.  He  was  remanded  to  judicial  custody  on  19.02.1994.   The  

retraction for the first time was made on 25.08.1994 vide Ext. D 142 and  

later  on  09.01.1995  vide  Ext.  D157.   In  his  first  retraction  the  accused  

claimed that  he had not  given any confessional  statement  at  all.   In  the  

subsequent retraction it was alleged that the accused was tortured physically  

and mentally and that during his remand period he was forced to make some  

confessional  statement  and  forced  to  sign  on  certain  written  papers  and  

some  blank  papers.  Neither  when  the  accused  was  presented  before  the  

concerned  Court  which  remanded  him  to  judicial  custody  nor  till  

09.01.1995, any allegation of physical torture was ever made. We have gone  

through the confessional statement and the certificate appended thereto and  

are  satisfied  that  the  confession  so  recorded was  in  conformity  with  the

Page 76

76

requirements of law. We therefore reject submission advanced on behalf of  

accused and find the confessional statement to be admissible in law.

64.1  The relevant portions of the confession of A3 Dr. Habib Ahmed Khan  

are as under:-

“…. I live in Kaharo Ka Adda, Raibareli. I am Homeopthetic  doctor and practice on my own. I  did my High School from  Govt. Inter College Rai Bareli in 1954 and registered myself as  Registered Medical Practitioner in 1954.

In the last week of Sept. 93 myself and Dr. Ansari met.  We both went together to the residence of Jamal Alvi. On that  day  Tuffail,  Afaque,  Irfan  and  one  or  two  more  boys  were  sitting in the house of Jamal Alvi. After sometime, the Kari also  joined  there.  We  held  a  discussion  over  the  atrocities  and  injustice  meted  out  to  Muslims.  A  discussion  was  held  regarding the insecurity feeling of Muslims after the demolition  of Babri Masjid and attitude of the Govt. towards Muslims and  it  was  decided  that  there  should  be  some action  so  that  the  Govt. I terrorized and it should be remembered that the matter  of Babri Masjid is alive.  Dr. Jalees Ansari suggested that on  6.12.1993, the day when the demolition of Babri Masjid would  complete  one  year,  bombs  explosion  should  be  caused  in  important running Rajdhani Trains of the country. So that Govt.  will  be  terrorized.  It  was  the  thinking  of  Jaless  Ansari  that  generally the high class people used to travel by these trains and  that too maximum Hindus. It will have more impact when the  people of this class will die in bomb explosions and the anger,  Muslims are having would get more publicity. Initially myself  and some others who were in the meeting, did not agree. It was  our suggestion that  by doing this some innocent people may  lose  their  lives.  But  after  sometime  it  was  decided  that  we  should be united in this matter  concerning Babri  Masjid and  there should be some action which could terrorize the people of  the country and Govt. irrespective of the livee of certain public.

Page 77

77

At the end we all agreed to the proposal of Dr. Jalees Ansari.  Jamal Alvi took the responsibility for causing bomb explosions  in trains in other parts of the country. Some members present in  the meeting raised the problems of funds for the procurements  of  explosive  for  causing  explosions  and  for  procurement  of  tickets and raised the points that from where the money will  come to meet the expenditure. Dr. Jales Ansari told that he will  give Rs. 3000/- Dr. Jaless Ansari told that either he will send  Rs. 3000/- to Jamal Alvi or to me. Then I also told that I will  give money in case it is not collected from anywhere. I told for  giving Rs. 3000/-.

We all people dispersed and thereafter Dr. Jalees Ansari  sent me Rs. 3000/- by post on around 18-20th Nov. I gave this  money to Jamal Alvi in Lucknow. During these days only I met  Kari in Lucknow. Kari gave me three packets of explosives and  told that it can catch fire after the pouring of acid and it can  cause explosions. He told me that it contained some potash and  sugar. I gave all the 3 packets to Jamal Alvi after sometime. I  told him how to cause explosion from it. I told him that while  keeping  the  bombs  in  trains  and  also  keep  these  packets,  because if in case the timing device would fail these packets  can cause explosions by getting fire.”

64.2  As stated above, insured envelope Ext.  P 230 was sent  by A1 Dr.  

Jalees Ansari to this accused and Ext. P 172, a document from Rai Barelli  

Post Office bears endorsement in Hindi and signature. As regards the receipt  

on insured envelope.  PW 37 Ganga Narayan, PW 38 Swami Dayal have  

testified that the endorsement in the Hindi appearing at Ext. P 172 was made  

by A3 who also signed in their presence. PW 132 H.L. Mukhi Hand Writing  

Expert has deposed that the endorsement and the signature in question were  

that of A3.

Page 78

78

64.3  The  aforesaid  circumstances  lend  complete  corroboration  to  the  

relevant contents of the confessional statement Ext. P251. The confession of  

A1 also lends complete corroboration. The role and involvement of A3 Dr.  

Habib Ahmed Khan in the conspiracy thus stands established.

65. Re:- A4 M. Jamal Alvi.

This accused was arrested on the same date like A3.  He was produced  

before  the  Judicial  Magistrate  on  15.01.1994  who  directed  that  he  be  

produced  before  the  Designated  Court,  Kanpur  which  after  he  was  so  

produced, by its orders dated 17.01.1994 and 22.01.1994 remanded him to  

police custody.  While in custody his confessional statement Ext. P-253 was  

recorded on 18.02.1994 and 19.02.1994. The accused submitted retraction  

on 25.8.1994 vide Ext.  D 144 and later  on 09.01.1995 vide Ext.  D-155.  

These retractions submitted that the confessional statement of the accused  

was obtained by coercion, misrepresentation, fraud and by using third degree  

methods.  However no complaint or objections was made when the accused  

was sent to judicial custody on 19.02.1994 or soon thereafter.  We have gone  

through the confessional statement where warning was given to the accused  

and satisfaction about voluntariness was recorded and through the certificate  

appended to the confessional statement.  In our view there is no infirmity on

Page 79

79

any count. We therefore reject the submissions advanced on behalf of the  

accused and hold the confessional statement Ext. P-253 to be admissible and  

reliable.

65.1  The relevant portions of the confessional statement Ext. P 253 are as  

under:-

“I studied at St. John’s College Agra, from where I did  M.Com in 1963. Later I went to Bombay and joined as Lecturer  in JMC Anjuman College of Commerce, Bombay. After a few  years I left the job and started my own business which I left in  1970, after my partner expired. In 1970, I did MA in Political  Science  from  Poona  University  and  in  1973  I  did  MA  in  Economics also from Poona University.

About  a  year  back,  sometimes  in  March-April’93,  Dr.  Habib of Rae Bareilli came to my house at Lucknow with one  Dr. Jalees Ansari,  who is originally a resident of Distt. Basti  and is presently residing at Bombay.  On meeting Dr. Jalees  Ansari I was reminded of a person similar to Dr. Ansari, whom  I had met at Bombay, I told Dr. Jalees that I had earlier met him  at  Bombay.   However  Dr.  Jalees  denied meeting me earlier.  During  the  meeting  Dr.  Jalees  spoke  about  the  plights  of  muslims in the country and the atrocities committed during the  communal riots particularly after  the demolition of  the Babri  Masjid  and  the  need  for  taking  some  action  to  terrorise  the  Government.   He also asked me if  I  could arrange for some  arms and explosives  for  him.   I  told  him that  I  know some  persons who had links with some militant groups in Kashmir  and they may be able to arrange some arms and explosives for  him.  After a few days Dr. Jalees Ansari again came to me and  discussed about his plans to carry out some bomb blasts in Jul- Aug’93.  He also wanted me to organize some bomb blasts on  fixed dates at Lucknow also.

Page 80

80

Later, sometimes towards the end of Sept’93, Dr. Jalees  Ansari  again  came  to  my  residence  with  Dr.  Habib  of  Rae  Bareilli.  On that day a number of boys who came to me for  coaching or borrowing books for binding etc. were present. Dr.  Jalees Ansari started a discussion on the injustice meted out to  muslim community on the issue of Babri Masjid, the situation  created out of communal riots and the economic condition of  the  muslims.  He wanted me to come out  openly against  the  Govt. and assist him in his terrorist and subversive activities, as  my  efforts  in  voicing  the  grievances  of  the  community  and  protesting agsint  the attitude of  the Govt.  through articles  in  Newspapers, magazines and books had failed. Dr. Jalees Ansari  also spoke to the boys present during the meeting namely Afaq,  Tuffail, Irfan and Hameed, they became very enthusiastic. Dr.  Jalees then suggested to all of us present there that something  drastic should be done to remind the Govt. that the Shrine of  Babri  Masjid  was  alive  and  injustice  was  being  done  to  muslims. He also suggested that to start with bomb blasts could  be carried out in important trains like Rajdhani Express through  out  the  country  on  6.12.1993,  the  first  anniversary  of  the  demolition of the Babri Masjid to terrorise the Govt. and the  people and avenge the demolition of Babri Masjid. He said that  mostly people from the upper class who are from the majority  Hindu community travel in these trains. If some persons from  this class are killed or injured, it  will  create a lot of impact.  Initially  this  proposal  was  opposed  by  me  and  some  other  present in the meeting, on the ground that by such bomb blasts  some innocent people may be killed. By that time ‘Kari’ had  also  joined the  meeting.  He agreed to  the  suggestion  of  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari.  He  also  asked  me and  others  to  agree  to  the  suggestion as Babri Masjid was an issue on which everybody  should be united. Later, Dr. Jalees Ansari asked me to take up  the responsibility of carrying out the bomb blasts in Rajdhani  Express trains in UP. And he would organize the bomb blasts in  other parts of the country. I was not agreeing to this also, but  ‘Kari’ told me that he will arrange everything and I only have  to supervise the work of the boys, who will carry out the work.  He told me not to bother, so I agreed to the suggestion of Dr.  Jalees. I also raised the question of funds for organizing these  bomb blasts. Dr. Jalees Ansari then offered to give Rs. 3000/-.

Page 81

81

He said he would send the money either to me or to Dr. Habib  who would give the amount to me. Dr. Habib also told us not to  bother about money. He said that if funds are not available he  would contribute Rs. 3000/-.

Later, sometimes in Nov’93, Dr. Habib came to me and  gave me Rs. 3000/-, which Dr. Ansari had sent to him. He also  gave me three packets containing  some explosives, which he  said can catch fire after sometime if acid is put  in it. He said  that this can be used to cause bomb blast in case the timing  device fails.  During this period ‘Kari’ had also met me on a  number  of  occasions.  I  gave  him  Rs.  3000/-  which  I  have  received from Dr.  Habib.  Sometimes  in  oct-nov’93 after  the  meeting in which it was decided to cause bomb blasts in trains  on 6.12.1993 ‘Kari’  advised me to administer  an oath to the  boys who were present in the meeting, to fight against the Govt.  and not to disclose the secrets of the group. Accordingly after a  few days sometime in Nov’93, I had administered an oath to  Afaq, Hameed, Irfan and Tuffail separately by asking them to  keep  their  hands  on  Koran  Sharif  and  recite  the  oath.  The  substance of the oath was ‘I will not do anything against the  law of Islam, I will not misuse the money given to me for the  cause of Islam and I will not disclose the secrets of our group’.  During this period Dr. Jalees Ansari had telephoned to me and  also written a letter to remind me of the ‘work’ to be done on  6/12/1993.

Just  a few days before 6/12/1993, ‘Kari’  gave me two  bombs in plastic lunch boxes, which he had made. He told me  the timings of the Rajdhani Express at Kanpur, and asked me to  go to Kanpur, with the boys Irfan and Hamid, to supervise their  work. Some circuits for timing had to be fixed in the bomb, I  got them fixed by Afaq. On 5.12.1993, Irfan, Hamid and myself  left  Lucknow for Kanpur, by bus.  We had taken the bombs  given to us by Kari. I had also taken the packets of explosives  given  to  me  by  Dr.  Habib.  The  boys  had  kept  the  Bombs  packets in a plastic bag “Literacy House”, which was lying in  my house. On reaching Kanpur, we stayed in a Hindu Hotel  near railway station. Name of the hotel is Hindu Apna Hotel. I  made entries in the Hotel register in the name of ‘Ramkumar’

Page 82

82

and  ‘Ramesh’  as  mentioned  the  address  as  ‘Pakali  Ganj,  Gonda’. I made entries in the fictitious Hindu name to conceal  my identity. In the night at around 10 pm Hamid and myself  went  to  the  Railway  Station.  I  remained on the  platform ad  Hamid  went  inside  one  coach  of  Rajdhani  Express  (going  towards calcutta) when it arrived at the station. It was  a pantry  car.  Hamid planted a bomb in the toilet and came out. Before  placing the bomb I had kept the packet of explosives with acid  given to me by Dr.  Habib. We then went back to our Hotel  room. In the morning at  about  4:30 AM, Hamid ,  Irfan and  myself left the hotel and went to the Railway Station. When the  Rajdhani Express going towards Delhi arrived at the platform. I  told Irfan to place the bomb in the toilet of one of the coaches.  Accordingly he placed the bomb in the toilet of a coach. This  time I forgot to kept the packet of explosive given by Dr. Habib  inside  the  bomb,  so  I  asked  Hamid to  place  this  in  another  coach. Accordingly, he placed it in another coach. I remained  on the platform. We had placed the packet of explosives in the  bomb as a precaution. In case the timer device fails this packets  could cause fire and ignite the bombs. Later, we all came back  to Lucknow.

……..I informed him about the bomb blasts carried out by my  group in the trains near Kanpur on 5/6.12.93.  Dr. Jalees Ansari  enquired from me as to where the bomb blasts were not of high  intensity as no person had been killed.  He was not very happy  as the bomb blasts carried out by us were of low intensity.

Sometimes in Sep’93, just a few days before the meeting,  in which decision was taken to plant bombs in prestigious trains  on 6.12.93, ‘Kari’ had come to my house.  He had come from  Kashmir and had brought a box, which he told me contained  some shawls and pashmina materials from Kashmir.

…….When Dr. Jalees Ansari had come to my house and plans  for bomb blast in trains on 6.12.93 were decided, ‘Kari’ had  told  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  that  he  had  brought  some  arms  and  explosives  from Kashmir.   He had  shown to  Dr.  Jalees  one

Page 83

83

important  9mm  pistol,  handgrenade,  timers  etc.  in  the  box  containing shawls etc.”

65.2.  PW  40  Prem  Shankar  Pandey,  Manager  Hindu  Apna  Hotel  was  

examined by the Prosecution to prove writing and signature in the Hotel  

Register Ext. P. 184. The report of the Handwriting expert at Ext. P. 292 and  

the deposition of PW 132 S.L. Mukhi, Handwriting expert prove the writing  

and signature in the register in question to be that of A4.  

65.3. At the time of the arrest of A4, large quantity of arms and explosives  

were recovered.

65.4. The material as above and the circumstances on record as well as the  

confessions of A1 and A3 lend complete corroboration to the confession of  

A4 and the case against him stands established.

66. Re: A7 Fazlur Rehman :  

This accused was arrested on 14.01.1994 in Mumbai and PW150 P.D.  

Meena  had  interrogated  him  on  04.02.1994.   Thereafter,  PW-150  P.D.  

Meena applied before the Designated Court, Ajmer seeking production cum  

arrest warrant, which was accordingly issued.  Thereafter CMM, Mumbai  

granted custody on 07.07.1994 and the accused was accordingly produced  

before the Designated Court, Ajmer which granted police custody.  Accused

Page 84

84

having desired to confess PW-150 P.D. Meena informed PW-62 H.C. Singh  

who  thereafter  recorded  the  confession  Ex  P-255  on  26.07.1994  and  

27.07.1994.  Soon after recording of the confession the confession was sent  

to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate and A7 was also produced before  

Chief Judicial Magistrate, in keeping with guidelines issued by this Court in  

Kartar  Singh  v. State  of  Punjab (supra).  PW-141  B.  M.  Gupta,  Chief  

Judicial  Magistrate,  Jaipur  before  whom  the  accused  was  produced  has  

testified about such production and also that  two sets  of  signatures were  

taken of this accused in the proceedings before said PW-141.  The order  

sheet, Ext. P-256 bears testimony to such signatures.  By subsequent order  

dated 03.08.1994 the accused was sent to judicial custody.  Neither at the  

stage when he was produced before PW-141 B.M. Gupta on 28.07.1994 nor  

on 03.08.1994 or soon thereafter any complaint was made or objection was  

raised about non voluntariness of the confessional statement.  The retraction  

Ext. D-152 was made for the first time on 25.11.1994 followed by another  

retraction Ext. D-160 dated 06.06.1995.  The retractions are in general terms  

that confessional statement was obtained by physical torture and coercion.  

Having gone through the material on record including the certification and  

satisfaction  about  voluntariness  of  confession,  we  are  satisfied  that  the  

confessional statement Ext. P-255 was in conformity with the recruitments

Page 85

85

of law and the guidelines laid down by this Court.  We, therefore, accept the  

confession to be correct and valid.  

66.1 The relevant portions of the confessional statement Ext. P-255 are as  

under:-

“After this, sometime in Nov’93 Dr. Jaless Ansari met me and  told me that he has planned to cause bomb blasts in prestigious  trains  throughout  the  country  on  6.12.1993,  the  day  Babri  Masjid was demolished a year back. He told me that this was to  protest  against  the  demolition  of   Babri  Masjid  and  to  take  revenge against Hindus. He asked me whether, I was willing to  join him in making this successful. As I was deeply hurt over  the  treatment  given  to  muslims  I  agreed  to  join  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari in his plans. Dr. Jalees Ansari first told me to purchase a  return ticket from Kota to Bombay for 1st class in Frontier Mail  for 6.12.1993 in the name of ‘Sameer’. He told me to write any  fake address on the requisition slip. He also gave me about Rs.  600/- to 700/- for the ticket. As per instructions I purchased the  ticket for 6.12.1993 in ‘Frontier Mail from Kota to Bombay in  1st Class. In the requisition slip I gave a fake address of Vikhroli  and returned the balance amount with the ticket to Dr. Jaless  Ansari. After few days ,Dr. Jalees Ansari and Saleem came to  me. Dr. Jalees Ansari told me that as per his plans for causing  bomb blasts in trains  on 6.12.1993. One ‘Tahir’ was to carry  out  bomb blast  in  Rajdhani  Express,  Bombay to Delhi,  near  Kota. He told me that ‘Tahir’ was not willing to travel in the  train and wanted someone else to travel in the train and carry  out the bomb blast. He asked me if I could do this. I agreed to  this Dr. Jaless Ansari told me that Tahir would be keeping the  bag  containing  the  bomb in  the  train  at  Baroda  Rly.  Stn.  I  would have to travel  in the train and put on the device near  Kota and get down. He told me that he has already arranged for  ticket in Rajdhani Express. He told me that he would tell me the  final programme on 2.12.1993. Dr. Jalees came to me again on  2.12.1993 and asked me to meet him outside Bombay Central

Page 86

86

Station, iIn the evening on 4.12.1993. Till then I had not known  Tahir closely. I only know that he was also residing on Souter  Street.

As instructed by Dr. Jalees Ansari, I reached the stall of  National Tours and Travel on 1.12.1993 at about 7 P.M. There I  met  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari,  Tahir  and Saleem.  One more  person,  whom I later came to known was ‘Amin’ of Madanpura came  there after some time. Dr. Jaless Ansari gave me two tickets for  journey from Baroda to Kota in Rajdhani Express and return  journey from Kota to Bombay by Frontier Mail, which I had  purchased earlier. He also gave me Rs. 700/- to Rs. 800/- for  my expenses on the way. Dr. Jalees Ansari gave one bomb kept  in an air bag of blue colour to Tahir. He gave another bomb  contained in an Alfa brief case to Saleem. Dr. Jalees Ansari also  pointed out the switch on in the bag and the brief case which  were to be put on to put the bomb device into action. Around  8P.M. Tahir, Saleem and myself left for Baroda by a deluxe bus  of  National  Tour   & Travels.  Bus  ticket  for  bus  journey  to  Baroda had been purchased by Dr. Jalees Ansari and given to  Tahir. On the way to Baroda Tahir told me that Saleem will be  going to Baroda with us. From there he would go to Surat to  carry out a bomb blast in another train.

We reached Baroda at about 6 A.M. Tahir took us to a  Hotel which was near a Mosque about 10 minutes walk from  the Rly. Stn. At the Hotel, one person by the name Achhu Bhai  received Tahir. He was known to Tahir as Tahir had come to  Baroda  earlier  and  stayed  in  this  Hotel.  Tahir  had  come  to  Baroda  earlier  to  survey  the  area  and  see  the  security  arrangements at the Rly. Stan. At the time of arrival of Rajdhani  Express.  Some  time  after  we  reached  the  Hotel,  Amin  also  reached there. He came to Baroda by bus. Tahir told me that he  will accompany Saleem to Surat. We stayed in two rooms in the  Hotel. The entries in the Hotel Register were made by Tahir for  most of the day we stayed in the Hotel. We went out only to  offer Namaz and food.

At about 8 P.M. on 5.12.1993, the day we had reached  Baroda Tahir, Saleem and myself left the Hotel and came to the

Page 87

87

Rly. Stn. Saleem stayed outside. I purchased a platform ticket  and entered the platform with Tahir. By then Tahir had taken  journey ticket to see my coach no. and seat no. We kept waiting  on  the  platform till  the  Rajdhani  Express  arrived.  When  the  train  arrived  Tahir  boarded  the  train  and  keep  the  bag  containing the bomb in the chair car coach adjoining Pantry Car  PC2 in which I had my reservation. After keeping the bag, he  came out. Later Tahir and myself boarded the train. He pointed  out to me the bag containing the bomb device. It was kept in the  Chair Car in the space between the seat and the coach wall. He  then gave me the journey ticket. I gave him the platform ticket.  I also gave him about Rs. 300/- to clear the Hotel Bill. After  Tahir  got  down I  returned to  my seat  in  the  Pantry car  and  occupied the seat.

After  the train left  Baroda,  the Conductor  checked the  train. He came to me and checked my ticket. Later, he offered  me a seat in the adjoining Chair Car. He took me to the seat  also but I refused to accept it as I saw the bag containing the  bomb, which Tahir had kept in the coach near the seat. I made  an excuse to the conductor that it is congested and will not suit  me. I came back and occupied my seat but I could not sleep  well as I had to switch on the bomb device and get down at  Kota. When the coach was nearing Kota Station at about 4.00  A.M. I went to the adjoining coach where Tahir had kept the  bag containing the bomb device I quietly switched on the bomb  device and got down at kota station. With a polythene bag in  which I had kept my clothes.

When  I  came  out  I  felt  cold  as  it  was  the  month  of  December, so I went to a hotel near the railway station. On the  main road,  I took a room in the Hotel. In the Hotel Register I  made an entry in the fake name of “Steven Samuel”, a Christian  name. I also gave a fake address of Kamanwar Nagar,Vikhroli  which  I had written.  On the requisition slip for reservation for  return  journey  by  frontier  mail  on  6.12.1993  from  Kota  to  Bombay. I stayed in the hotel till around 12:30 P.M. As I could  not sleep well I left the Hotel and came to the Rly. Station and

Page 88

88

waited for  the Frontier  Mail.  On the platform at  the railway  station. I came to know about the bomb blast in the Rajdhani  Express  between  Kota  and  Sawaimadhopur  Stn.  When  the  Frontier Mail came I boarded the 1st Class coach in which I had  a reservation in the false name of ‘Sameer’ I travelled under  this name and reached Bombay on 7.12.1993. The reservation  in the Rajdhani Express from Baroda on 5.12.1993 was also in  the  name  of  ‘Sameer’  I  had  travelled  upto  Kota  under  this  name. After reaching Bombay I went straight to my house. ”

66.2 Ext. P-10 is a reservation form by which the ticket was booked in the  

name  of  “Sameer”  from  Kota  to  Mumbai  in  Frontier  Mail  leaving  

06.12.1993.  According to expert opinion Ext. P-291, the writing and the  

signature  appearing on Ext.  P-10 reservation form are that  of  A7 Fazlur  

Rehman.   The  testimony  of  PW-133  S.C.  Mittal,  Handwriting  Expert  

establishes this fact.

 66.3 Similarly, Register Ext. P-7 of Shri Anand Hotel at Kota which was  

seized vide seizure memo Ext. 523 shows the writing signifying stay of one  

‘Samuel’ with address Kannamwar Nagar, Vikhroli, Mumbai.  This entry at  

Ext. P-7 has also been found by the Handwriting Expert in his opinion Ext.  

P-291 and subsequent deposition in Court to be that of A7.

66.4 PW 33 Md. Sadiq, Partner of Firm named Faruq Impex where A7  

used to work deposed in Court that A7 had not come to the office on 3 rd, 4th,

Page 89

89

6th and 7th December, 1993.  The Attendance Register Ext. P-164 was also  

produced on record in support of such assertions.

Therefore, the circumstances in the form of reservation form Ext. P-

10,  Hotel  Register  Ext.  P-7  and  the  absence  from  duty  signified  by  

Attendance Register Ext. P-164 do support  and corroborate the contents of  

the  confessional  statement  Ext.  P-255.  The  confession  of  A1 also  lends  

corroboration on material particulars. The case against A7 thus stands fully  

established.

67. Re: A14 Md. Amin :  

This accused was initially arrested in September, 1994 by CBCID Bombay  

in connection with some other case and having come to know about such  

arrest PW-150 P.D. Meena moved an application on 10.10.1994 before the  

Designated  Court,  Ajmer  seeking  his  production  warrant,  which  was  

accordingly issued.  His custody was thereafter given on 27.10.1994 and the  

accused was brought to Ajmer and produced before the Designated Court on  

28.10.1994 on which date police custody was granted.  He having desired to  

confess PW-150 P.D. Meena produced him before PW-62 H.C. Singh who  

recorded confessional statement Ext.P-257 on 17.11.1994 and 18.11.1994.  

Thereafter  the  accused  was  sought  to  be  produced  before  Chief  Judicial

Page 90

90

Magistrate,  Jaipur  along  with  covering  letter  Ext.-258.   However,  since  

Chief  Judicial  Magistrate  was  on  leave,  the  Additional  Chief  Judicial  

Magistrate directed that the accused be produced on 22.11.1994.  He was  

accordingly  produced  before  PW-141  Brij  Mohan  Gupta,  Chief  Judicial  

Magistrate on 22.11.1994.  PW-141 opened the sealed envelope containing  

confession  and  having  asked  the  accused  about  the  confession,  took  

signatures  of  the  accused  in  acknowledgement  on  every  page  of  the  

confession.  He was thereafter sent to judicial custody and the retraction for  

the first time vide Ext. D-150 was made on 26.08.1995.  We have seen the  

confessional  statement  Ext.  P-257  which  bears  signatures  of  confessing  

accused at  every page and the deposition of PW-141 Brij  Mohan Gupta,  

Chief Judicial Magistrate.  No complaint at that time was made about any  

undue influence, coercion or torture or soon thereafter.  The contents of the  

confessional statement as well as the certification completely establish the  

satisfaction of the Recording Officer about voluntariness of the confession  

which part is consistent with the requirements in law.  We, therefore, accept  

the confessional statements of Ext. P-257 to be valid and in conformity with  

the requirements of law and guidelines issued by this Court and accept it to  

be admissible and reliable.

Page 91

91

67.1 The relevant portions of the confessional statement Ext. P-257 are as  

under:-

“Dr. Jalees Ansari also taught us to prepare Tiffin box bombs  with watch timer device. Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  had  also  taught  us  to  make  bombs  from  plumbing pipe.

Sometimes in August 93 when Dr. Jalees Ansari, Tahir  and myself were discussing about the ways to take revenge for  the  demolition  of  Babri  Masjid  and  create  terror  among the  people.  I  suggested  that  we  should  cause  bomb  blasts  in  important trains on the first  anniversary of  the demolition of  Babri Masjit, Dr. Jalees Ansari liked the idea.  Later sometimes  during  November  1993  when  I  met  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari,  he  informed me that  he was working on a  plan  to  cause  bomb  blasts in important trains on 6.12.1993.  He told me that he had  spoken to Mohd Saleem and Tahir also, about it. They would be  causing  a  bomb  blast  in  train  near  Surat.  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  asked me to provide Rs. 2000/- for this work, which I provided  after a few days in cash.

On  4.12.1993  in  the  evening  at  about  5:30  P.M.  Dr.  Jalees Ansari telephoned me at my residence and informed to  me  that  Mohd.  Saleem who was  to  go  to  Surat  for  causing  bomb blast in train, had not reached the Bombay Central Bus  Stand. He told me to go to the residence of Mohd. Saleem to  look for him. I then went to the residence of Mohd. Saleem and  came to know that he had already left  the house for the bus  stand.   I then went to Bombay Central Bus Stand and met Dr.  Jalees Ansari. Mohd. Saleem had already reached there Tahir  and one Shamim, whose full name is Fazlur Rehman were also  there.  At  that  time,  I  came  to  know  that  Shamim was  also  involved in the activities of Dr. Jalees Ansari and was to plant a  bomb in Rajdhani Express going from Bombay to New Delhi.  Tahir was to accompany him upto Baroda Station. Dr. Jalees  Ansari asked me to accompany Mohd. Saleem who was to plant  a bomb in ‘Flying Queen Express’ at Surat Railway Station. He

Page 92

92

told  me  that  initially  all  of  us  will  have  to  go  to  Baroda.  I  readily agreed to this as I had initially given the idea of causing  bomb blasts in train on 6.12.1993.As I was not having a bus  ticket for Baroda, I purchased a ticket for the night train and  went to my house to collect my clothes. Money for purchasing  the  ticket  was  provided  by  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  who  also  accompanied me to the house. Later at the time of boarding the  train Dr. Jalees Ansari gave me a slip in which address of Hotel  Deluxe,  where  Tahir  Saleem and  Shamim were  to  stay  was  written. I travelled in the general compartment of the train and  reached Baroda at about 6 AM on 5.12.1993. I contacted Tahir,  Saleem and Shamim at Hotel Deluxe which was near a Masjid  close  to  the  Railway  Station.  They  had  taken  two  rooms.  I  stayed with Saleem. In the evening Tahir, Saleem and Shamim  went  to  the  Railway  Station  where  as  per  our  plan,  Tahir  planted the bomb device in a bag, given to him by Dr. Jalees  Ansari,  in Rajdhani  Express Train when it  arrived at  Baroda  Station. After keeping the device, Tahir came out of the train  and Shamin boarded the train for causing the bomb blast.  Tahir  and Saleem returned back to the Hotel and informed me that  Shamim had left  for  the target.  Thereafter,  Tahir  cleared the  Hotel Bills and we left the Hotel for the bus stand where Tahir  boarded  the  bus  for  Bombay.  Saleem  and  myself  went  to  Railway  Staion  where  we  boarded  a  train  for  Surat.  We  travelled in a general compartment. The tickets were purchased  by Saleem. Saleem and myself reached Surat at about 4 AM on  6.12.1993. We waited on the platform at the Staion for about an  hour. Saleem, who was carrying the bomb device, containing in  an Alfa brief case given by Dr. Jalees Ansari, then went to the  ‘Flying  Queen  Express’  train  standing  at  the  platform  and  planted  device  in  a  coach.  He  came  out  of  the  coach  after  connecting the wires and activating the device. Saleem told me  that he had reserved a seat in the coach earlier. After Saleem  had planted the device we purchased tickets for Bombay and  left  by  a  train  which  was  going  to  Bombay.  On  reaching  Bombay,  we  came  to  know  that  bomb  devices  planted  in  Rajdhani  Exp.  Train  and  Flying  Queen  Express  by  me  had  exploded injuring few persons and damaging Railway property.  The Bomb blasts had also created a terror in the people.

Page 93

93

One or  two days  after  returning to  Bombay I  met  Dr.  Jalees  Ansari  and informed him as  to  how bombs had been  planted as per plan.  During my talk with Dr. Jalees Ansari, I  came to know that bomb blasts in Rajdhani Express train near  Kanpur  and  A.P.  Expres  near  Hyderabad  had  also  been  arranged by him through his men.”

67.2. The confession of A1 lends complete corroboration to the confession  

of this accused. The role of this accused thus stands firmly established.

68.       Re:      A-15 Aizaz Akbar   

This accused was initially arrested by Bombay Police in connection  

with  some other  case.   On  production  warrant  issued  by the  Designated  

Court,  Ajmer  pursuant  to  the  application  moved  by  PW145,  K.S.  Nair,  

custody  of  this  accused  was  given  on  28.05.1997.  The  accused  was  

thereafter produced before the Designated Court, Ajker on 29.05.1997 and  

police custody was granted.  He was brought to Delhi on 30.05.1997 and  

kept in custody.  On 01.06.1997 he having desired to confess, PW-145 K.S.  

Nair informed PW1 O.P. Chhatwal and produced the accused before him.  

The  confessional  statement  Ext.P-1  of  this  accused  was  recorded  on  

01.06.1997 and 02.06.1997.  He was produced on 03.06.1997 before PW-

147  Mr.  S.K.  Kaushik,  Chief  Metropolitan  Magistrate,  Delhi.  The  

proceedings of the Court of CMM, Delhi of 03.06.1997 are marked  Ext.P-

Page 94

94

516.   According to  PW-147,  the confessing accused had admitted that  a  

confessional statement was recorded a day earlier and that it was the same  

statement.  PW-147 thereafter read over to him the confessional statement.  

The accused was thereafter produced before the Designated Court, Ajmer on  

05.06.1997 and was remanded to judicial custody.  The retraction came a  

month  later  on  05.07.1997  vide  Ext.D-2  stating  that  the  confessional  

statement was obtained by employing third degree method and his signatures  

were obtained on blank papers.  The retraction further stated that the accused  

was never produced before any magistrate.   In the face of  the testimony  

coming  from  POW-147  Mr.  S.K.  Kaushik,  CMM,  the  retraction  is  

unacceptable.  We have gone through the contents of the confession as well  

as the certification recording satisfaction about the voluntariness and find the  

confession to be consistent with the requirement of law and in conformity  

with the guidelines issued by this Court.  We therefore accept confessional  

statement Ext.P1 to be correctly recorded and admissible in law.

68.1 The relevant contents of confessional statement Ext.P-1 are as under:

“We  left  for  Hyderabad  at  about  11  PM and  reached  there  at  about  7  AM  and  stayed  at  President  Lodge  near  Mauzam  Jahi  Market.  The  registration  formalities  were  completed by Dr. Jalees Ansari in the lodge. We had breakfast  in the market. After some time Dr. Jalees Ansari suggested that  we must see the Police Station where bombs should be planted  for  explosion.  Therefore,  Dr.  Ansari,  Shamuddin  and  myself

Page 95

95

left for the market in an auto rickshaw. We asked the driver to  take us to market.  On way we saw Abid Police Station.  Dr.  Ansari decided to plant a bomb at this police station. Then we  went  to  Humayun Nagar  Police  Station  as  suggested  by Dr.  Ansari. After surveying, we returned to the lodge.

In the afternoon Dr. Ansari asked me to go to market and  purchase  nails  and  plaster  of  paris.  I  went  by  an  auto  and  purchased ¼ Kg nails and 2 Kgs. Plaster of paris. In the lodge  Dr. Ansari prepared two bombs, which were covered by Plaster  of  Paris.  He  instructed  me  and  Saleem  to  plant  the  bomb  outside  Abid  Police  Station  after  connecting  two  wires.  He  directed us to go away immediately after planting. Likewise he  instructed Shamsuddin and Zaheeruddin to plant a bomb at the  Humanyu Nagar Police Station. He asked us to plant the bombs  before 10 PM and leave for Gulbarga by 11 PM bus. Dr. Ansari  himself left for Bombay by bus at 4:30 P.M. It was in August,  1993.

At about 9PM, I alongwith Saleem went to Abid Police  Station in an auto. Outside the Police Station there was an STD  Booth. We quietly went near the STD booth and I connected  the wires of the bomb and left it by the side of the Booth. Both  of  us then left  for  Central  Bus Depot,  as  had been arranged  earlier. After 20-25 minutes Shamsuddin and Zaheeruddin also  reached there after planting the bomb at Humayun Nagar PS.  Then  Saleem  left  for  Bombay  by  bus  and  we  then  left  for  Gulbarga bus at 11 PM. We reached Gulbarga at about 7:30  AM. We went to our houses. Again we met at about 10-11AM  at  the  house  of  Shamsuddin.  We  read  in  newspapers  about  explosion at both the Police Stations. I stayed at Gulberga for a  week and then returned to Bombay.  I met Dr. Jalees Ansari and  told him about our success in causing explosions. He was very  happy  and  encouraged  me.  I  then  continued  to  work  in  my  office. I was meeting Dr. Jalees Ansari off and on.”

….On his return from Bombay in last week of November 1993,  Shamsuddin told me that Dr. Jalees Ansari had made plans to  cause bomb explosions in prestigious trains.  He also conveyed  to me this instructions of Dr. Jalees Ansari that I should plant a

Page 96

96

bomb in Bangalore-Kurla Express at Pune.  This was to be done  on 6.12.1993 in the memory of demolition of Babri Masjid.    

….On 04.12.93 I went to the house of Shamsuddin who told me  that he was making the bomb and that I should collect it from  him on 5.12.93.  On 5.12.93 I told my family that I was going  to Hamdabad to attend marriage of one of my friends.  I left  home at about 7.PM and went to the house of Shamsuddin.  He  gave me a bomb, which kept in a carry-bag.  

….I reached Gulbarga Station on 5.12.93 at about 8.15 P.M.  The  Bangalore-Kurla  Express  arrived  at  about  8.30  P.M.   I  boarded the trains alongwith the bomb in the carry bag.  My  berth was a lower berth.  I could not sleep.  At about 04.30 AM  the train reached PUNE Station.  I quietly joined the two wires  of the bomb and left it below my seat in the same carry bag.  I  then came out of the train and took an auto from outside the  Railway Station and went to Ruby Hospital.  

68.2   The confession of this accused is fully supported and corroborated by  

the  confession  of  A1.  The  role  of  this  accused  in  planting  a  bomb  in  

Bangalore-Kurla express as part of the larger conspiracy stands established.  

The case of the Prosecution against this accused is fully established.

69. Re: A-16 Abre Rehmat Ansari  

One Qamrul Hassan Kashmi was arrested on 17.12.1994 pursuant to  

warrant of arrest issued by Designated Court, Ajmer.  The Designated Court  

had granted police custody till 07.01.1995 and from 07.01.1995 this accused  

was  remanded  to  judicial  custody.   On  01.09.1995  he  was  released  on

Page 97

97

interim bail.  On 18.04.1995 an application under Section 169 Cr.P.C. was  

moved by PW-150 P.D. Meena that no evidence was found regarding his  

involvement in the present matters.

It may be mentioned that in the confessional statements of A3 and A4  

there is a reference to one “Kari” who attended the meeting of September  

1993 and Qamrul Hassan Kashmi was arrested on the suspicion that he was  

“Kari” as referred to in the confessional statement of A3 and A4.  However  

after  it  was  found  that  he  was  not  in  any  way  involved  in  the  matter,  

aforesaid application under Section 169 was moved.

69.1 A-16  Abre  Rehmat  Ansari  was  arrested  by  PW-113  Jai  Singh  in  

connection  with  some  other  matter  and  during  his  interrogation,  his  

involvement in the present serial train blasts came to be known. Said PW113  

wrote letter Ext.P3 dated 26.12.1997 to the Superintendent of Police, STF,  

CBI,  New Delhi  informing about  the  arrest  of  Abre  Rehmat  Ansari  and  

about  his  involvement  in  train  bomb  blasts  cases.   An  application  was  

thereafter moved by PW-145 K.S. Nair for production of said Abre Rehmat  

Ansari and the accused was produced on 30.12.1997 and police custody was  

granted.  The accused having expressed desire to confess, PW-145 K.S. Nair  

produced  him  before  PW1  O.P.  Chhatwal  on  01.01.1998  and  the

Page 98

98

confessional  statement  Ext.P-4  was  recorded  by  PW1 O.P.  Chhatwal  on  

01.01.1998 and 02.01.1998.  A16 was thereafter produced before PW146  

Prem Kumar, CMM, Delhi.  PW-146 Prem Kumar, CMM deposed that he  

had asked the confessing accused, who admitted the confessional statement  

to  be  his,  that  there  was no misconduct  or  physical  torture  and  that  the  

confessional statement was bearing his signature.  The proceeding to that  

effect Ext.P-514 bear the signature of the confessing accused as well as that  

of  PW-146  Prem Kumar,  CMM.   The  accused  was  thereafter  produced  

before the Designated Court, Ajmer and was sent to judicial custody.  The  

retraction  Ext.D-1 came six  months  later  on  26.06.1998.   The retraction  

stated that the accused was forced to sign some written/plain papers which  

as far  his  apprehension could be used as confession.   In  the face of  the  

deposition  of  PW-146,  Prem  Kumar,  CMM  and  proceedings  Ext.P-514  

dated 03.01.1998, we have no hesitation in discarding said submission.   At  

no stage any complaint was made when the accused was produced before  

PW-146.   We  have  gone  through  the  certification  appended  to  the  

confessional statement as well as contents of the confession and are satisfied  

that the confessional statement is in conformity with the legal requirements.  

We therefore hold the confessional statement to be admissible.

69.2 Relevant portions of the confessional statement Ext.P-4 are as under:

Page 99

99

“My full name is Abre Rehmat Ansari.People also call  me by name Kari. My father name is Noor Mohd. Ansari.  

……………………

In Aug-Sep 1993, Illiyas introduced Jamal Alvi, Tuffail  and Sufiyan who came from Lucknow. Illiyas called me to meet  them at University Ground. It was decided in the meeting that  Illiyas would give me the materials, i.e. arms & explosives etc.  My  job  would  be  to  transport  the  same  to  Jamal  Alvi’s  residence at Lucknow and rest will be done by  other people.  After 2-3 days we had again met at the same place and the same  talks  were  repeated.  Jamal  Alvi  had  also  given  his  address  which  was  Nakhas  Chowk  (Old  Nakhas,  Phool  Wali  Gali,  House  No.  29/99),  Lucknow.  He  had  given  his  address  in  writing. I had kept the said paper safely. Now, it is not with  me.After 15-20 days, Illiyas called me in the residence of Papa  at  Khaniyar  and gave  me seven  plastic  tiffin  types  boxes  in  which explosives were filled and were made into bombs. Timer  and detonators were also fitted with them and for detonating the  bombs,  the two protruding wires  were to  be joined.  He also  gave me one pistol having a magazine with eight rounds. He  told  me to  take all  the materials  to  Lucknow and give  it  to  Jamal  Alvi  at  his  residence.  He  also  told  me that  as  it  was  decided  earlier,  use  these  bombs  on  6th December,  1993  in  trains or some other good places. I was also given Rs. 6000/-  for  expenditure.  I  kept  all  those  materials  in  a  steel  box  alongwith my clothes and reached Jammu by bus. Later on I  reached Lucknow by train. I came to Nakhas by cycle rikshaw  from Lucknow Station and reached Phool Wali Gali. There I  was dropped by someone at Jamal Alvi’s residence. I met Jamal  Alvi  there.  I  told  him  that  I  had  brought  the  materials  and  showed him all the materials, which were in my box.

I stayed for around 10 days at Jamal Alvi residence. On  my reaching Lucknow, after around 2 days many people came

Page 100

100

into the house of Jamal Alvi to whom Jamal Alvi introduced  myself. Dr. Jalees Ansari was among them who had come from  Bombay.  Dr.  Habib had come from Rai  Bareli.  Agaque was  from  Lucknow  only.  Tuffail  and  Sufiyan  who  met  me  at  Kashmir were also there. Irfan was also with them who was  from Lucknow. One boy namely Mustaq also met. He was from  Allahabad. We all had a meeting in which Jamal Alvi told that  he  had  also  brought  some  materials  from  Kashmir  earlier  showed it to us. The said material was black explosive and one  pistol. The material I had brought was also told to all people. It  was decided in the meeting that Bomb Blast would be caused in  trains. Abu Bakar who was studying at Nadwa at Lucknow was  also present.

During my stay for 10 days at Jamal Alvi’s residence, I  used to meet those people whenever they came to Jamal Alvi  residence. At day time I also used to go for walk. 2-3 times I  also  visited  Nadwa Hostel  alongwith  Abu Bakar.  I  also  met  there  one  Abdul  Wahid  @ Yusuf,  who  had  already  studied  there. I was told that he is from Kashmir, and connected with  militancy.  He did not tell  his address on asking by me.After  living for 10 days I went to my home at Basti. After living for  10-15 days I again went back to Kashmir. I had told Illiyas that  I had given all materials to Jamal Alvi, which I had factually  handed over to Jamal Alvi.

When I was staying in Lucknow for 10 days, Abu Bakar  had advised in the presence of all that bomb blast should be  caused in Jaipur at Hawa Mahal and Johiri Bazar. It was also  decided that I should first see the place. I was given two notes  of 500 rupees each by Abu Bakar for this job. But I did not go  Jaipur at that time. It was decided to cause blast in trains for  which I had given all materials to Jamal Alvi, and also stated  the instructions  of  Illiyas.  It  was  to  be decided by the other  person in which trains, blast would be caused.  The materials  given by me was to be used for causing blast. I had told all the  things to Illiyas after going back.

Page 101

101

In  Oct-  Nov  1993,  Illiyas  had  asked  me  for  going  to  Lucknow.  He  gave  me  about  5kg  explosive  (Barood)  04  detonators and 4 timers.  He had already fitted the detonators  and timers in explosives (Barood), and told me how to keep  those in boxes, and how to join the wire, so that it could cause  blast. At that time the wires were covered with tape. Illiyas had  given  me Rs.  2000/-  for  fare  etc.  and  asked  me to  give  all  materials to Jamal Alvi. He also told me to use the  materials  for causing blasts at appropriate place.

……………….

When I came back to Kashmir after getting training from  Pakistan  then  Illiyas  kept  my  name  “Kari”  and  told  all  his  colleagues about it. Thereafter everybody was knowing me by  the name ‘Kari’.”

69.3  It was submitted on behalf of this accused that the Prosecution had  

arrested Qamrul Hasan Kashmi as Kari and that this accused had nothing to  

do with present crimes nor was this accused known as Kari. However his  

statements in the confession,  which is admissible,  completely negate this  

submission. The confession further goes on the narrate his involvement in  

the crimes.

69.4  The association of this accused with A4 and the fact that this accused  

had supplied explosive material to him and that this accused was present in  

the meeting of September 1993 and took active part thereafter stand fully

Page 102

102

corroborated from the confessions of A4 and other accused. The case of the  

Prosecution against this accused stands fully established.

70.  The case of the Prosecution against aforementioned Accused Nos. 1, 2,  

3,  4,  7,  14,  15  and  16  thus  stands  fully  established.  The  confessional  

statements of each of these accused which are found to be admissible in law,  

themselves  are  sufficient  to  establish  the  case  of  the Prosecution  against  

them. Even them we looked for corroboration from circumstances proved on  

record. The corroboration is also available inter se through the confessions  

of the other co-accused as well. Consequently, the conviction and sentence  

recorded by the Designated Court against each of these Accused,  namely  

A1, A2, A3, A4, A7 ,A14, A15 and A16 is maintained and the appeal at the  

instance of each of them stands dismissed.

71. We now consider the case of the prosecution and the material against  

other accused, namely, A5, A8, A9, A10, A11 and A13.

71.1 As regards A5, the confessions of A1, A3, A4 and A16 refer to his  

role.   Confession of  A4 discloses that  A5 was present  in the meeting of  

September 1993 where all had agreed and responsibility for causing bomb  

blasts in Northern part of the country was taken by A4.  Confession of A4  

further states that he had given A5 the responsibility to carry out the activity

Page 103

103

as agreed and that he had got the circuits fixed from A5.  The fact that A5  

was present in the meeting of September 1993 is evident from confessions of  

A1,  A3  and  A16  as  well.   PW41  Tahir  Raza  Abdi,  who  identified  A5  

deposed that A5 had come along with A1 Dr. Jalees Ansari for his passport  

work.  This again establishes the presence of A5 at the relevant time.  It is  

true  that  while  considering  confession  of  a  co-accused  prudence  would  

demand that there must be corroboration coming from material on record.  

The role of A5 is also evident from the confessions of A1, A3, A4 and A16  

which not only lend corroboration to each other but also get support from the  

testimony of  PW41 Tahir  Raza  Abdi.   We therefore  hold,  even  without  

referring to the confession of  A5 Ext.P-241A, that  the role of  A5 in the  

present conspiracy stands fully established. This appeal at the instance of A5  

is therefore dismissed and his conviction and sentence as recorded by the  

Designated Court is affirmed.

71.2 As  regards  A8,  apart  from  reference  to  his  role,  as  stated  in  the  

confession of A1, there is nothing on record as against this accused.  No  

prosecution witness has stated anything against him nor any other confession  

makes any reference to him.  All that we have on record is the confession of  

A1 who names this accused as his associate including the fact that he had  

assisted  him in  planting  bombs  on  other  occasions  as  well.   We find  it

Page 104

104

difficult to rely on the confession of A1, a co-accused simplicitor without  

there being any corroboration coming from any other material on record.  

Since we have eschewed consideration of confession of A8 himself, we find  

no material on record to support his conviction and sentence.

71.3 As regards A9, confession of A15 discloses that he introduced A9 to  

A1 and the confession further records about the role played by A9 and his  

association in causing bomb blasts at police station in Hyderabad.  However  

those incidents are not the ones for which A9 is presently being tried nor is it  

the  case  of  the  prosecution  that  those  blasts  were  part  of  the  present  

conspiracy.  Insofar as the present incident is concerned, the confession of  

A15 is silent about the role played by A9 and therefore that confession is not  

of any assistance in considering the matter as against A9.  We are then left  

with  confession  A1  who  undoubtedly  refers  to  the  role  of  A9.   This  

confession goes on to say that A1 had taught A9 how to make bombs and  

also that he had discussed the plan with A9.  However in the absence of any  

other  material  on  record  to  lend  any  semblance  of  corroboration  to  the  

confession of A1 we find it extremely difficult to sustain the conviction and  

sentence of A9 simply on the basis of confession of A1.

Page 105

105

71.4 As regards A10 his role is neither referred to in the confession of A1  

or A15 nor there is any material other than the confession of A10 himself on  

record.   The  conviction  and  sentence  of  A10  is  therefore  completely  

unsustainable.

71.5 As regards A11 the confession of A15 discloses the involvement and  

role  played  by  A1  in  causing  bomb  blasts  in  Hyderabad  on  previous  

occasions.   As regards the bomb blasts  that  occurred in A.P. Express on  

06.12.1993, the confession of A15 narrates that on 04.12.19093 he had gone  

to the house of A11 who told him that he was making bomb and that A15  

should collect it  from him on 05.12.1993.  Accordingly A15 went to the  

house of A11 who gave him a bomb which was kept in a carry bag.  It is this  

bomb kept in a carry bag which A15 had kept below his berth in Bangalore –  

Kurla Express.  A1 in his confession also referred to the role played by A11  

in causing bomb blasts in Hyderabad on previous occasions and that he had  

discussed the plan with A11.  As regards the present matter the confession  

stated that A1 had given one bomb to A11 on 02.12.1993.  The confession  

further  stated  that  after  the  bomb  blasts  A11  and  A12  had  met  him  in  

Bombay and he was told that the bomb in A.P. Express was planted by A12  

and that A15 had planted the bomb in Bangalore – Kurla Express which did

Page 106

106

not explode.  The confessions of A1 and A15 are thus consistent and show  

that a bomb was given by A1 to this accused who in turn, gave the bomb  

that  was  meant  for  Bangalore  Kurla  Express.   The  association  of  this  

accused  as  stated  in  the  confession  of  A1  is  fully  corroborated  by  the  

confession of A15. Even without referring to the confession of this accused,  

for  reasons  stated  hereinabove,  the  involvement  of  this  accused  in  the  

present  conspiracy is fully established.  We therefore find the case of the  

prosecution established against this accused.  

71.6 As regards A13 there is a reference about his role in the confession of  

A15 to the effect that on 05.12.1993 when A15 had gone to the house of  

A11, A13 was also present.  Apart from this there is no reference to anything  

about A13.  The confession of A1 also does not make any reference nor does  

it  attribute  any  role  to  A13.   In  the  circumstances  the  conviction  and  

sentence of A13 is not sustainable at all.

72.  Summing up, the case of the prosecution, in our considered view stands  

fully established as against A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A7, A11, A14, A15 and  

A16. We hold them guilty of the offences with which they were charged and  

while  dismissing  their  appeals  maintain  their  conviction  and sentence  as  

recorded by the Designated Court. The appeals in so far as Accused Nos. 8,

Page 107

107

9, 10 and 13 are allowed and their conviction and sentence is set aside. The  

Accused Nos. 8, 9, 10 and 13 shall be set at liberty, unless their custody is  

required in any other matter.

73. This appeal is disposed of accordingly.

..………..………………………….J  (Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla)  

……….…..………………………J      (Uday Umesh Lalit)

New Delhi May 11, 2016