Dear Friends,
Greetings!
Enclosed herewith please find the typed copy of the Judgment in Dr. Binayak Sen's Case. Although Kavita Srivastava, National Secretary, PUCL, has already mailed scanned copy of the judgment, we got it typed as there are plans to print it, for wider availability. We are also getting the same translated into English. But, I'll coordinate it with Kavita to avoid duplication. We need to print the English translation, along with some very comprehensive and critical comments on the judgment.
We hope you would find it useful in trying to understand how hollow is the judgment, without any application of judicial mind, and also prejudiced.
To give you only one example, that also relates to a reference about me in the judgement:
In paragraph 32 of the said judgment, Public Witness No. 41, Sri Vijay Thakur, who served as the SHO in Konta Thana from 31.3.2003 to 06.05.2006, deposes that the urban network supporters of naxalites used to attend meetings organized by Naxalites. He further takes the name of several people who used to attend such meetings; that among them are Dr. Binayak Sen, Rajendra Sail, Pradeep Singh etc.
Further paragraphs Nos. 33, 34, 35 totally ignore what PW 41 admitted during the cross-examination, which is very relevant regarding his deposition in this case. I was physically present on that day in the Trial Court.
During his cross-examination, PW No. 41, Sri Vikay Thakur admitted the following facts:
1. That he got this information through an informer, whose name he does not recall;
2. That he did not make any entry into the police station records about such meetings taking place;
3. That he did not inform orally and in writing his superiors about such meetings taking place;
4. That he knew and realizes that naxalism posed a a grave threat to the nation, and was a top priority law-and-order problem; even then he did not feel it necessary to take any action on such information; and that he kept quiet about this relevant and dangerous aspect of the naxalite activities all these years;
5. That he did not disclose this information in his statement recorded u/s 161 of Cr.P. C., but is doing it now.
I was physically present in the Court, and the Public Prosecutor, kept asking him if he recognized anyone by face, who was present in the court. PW 41, Mr. Vijay Thakur only recognized Dr. Binayak Sen, but admitted that he had seen his photographs in the news-paper and TV.
I am purposely recalling these facts of the Trial, as the cross-examination had clearly established that the PW 41 was a tutored witness of the State. Interestingly, this witness was included in the second list of the witnesses produced by the Prosecution, and was not in the list submitted with the original Charge Sheet.
Asit Sen Gupta, a writer and editor, has also been convicted on the same day (24.12.2010) u/s 124 A read with 120 B of the IPC (pertaining to sedition) by another Court at Raipur District Court. But, he was given only 3 years of sentence.
- Rajendra K Sail
Former President,
Chhattisgarh PUCL
Mobile: 098268-04519