# Subesh Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2023) 3 ILRA 485
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2023-02-28
- **Case number:** Application U/S 482. No. 5106 of 2022
- **Bench:** Dinesh Kumar Singh
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/subesh-kumar-singh-v-state-of-u-p-ors-49860
- **Pages:** 16

## Headnote

Criminal Law - Code of Criminal Procedure
- Sections 173 & 197-Allegations against
retired/serving public /police officers-who were
acting in discharge of their official duty when
investigation carried out-CBI filed closure reprt
after reaching to conclusion that it was suicideprotest petition-supplementary closure reportagain protest filed-Magistrate rejected second
final report-treated protest petition as complaint
case-no
prior
sanction
u/s
197
Cr.P.C.-
Magistrate should not have acted on guess of
the complainant- existence of overwhelming
material and compelling reasons is must before
summoning-complaint not disclose commission
of offence u/s302 and 120-B IPC-impugned
order set-aside.
Applications allowed. (E-9)
486 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
List of Cases cited:

## Text

_Characters 0–39,840 of 53,541. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39840 for what follows._

3 All. Subesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
485

15. In the aforesaid judgments, the
Apex Court has categorically held that
compromise can be made between the
parties even in respect of certain cognizable
and non compoundable offences. The
present case is also a case where two
societal interests are in clash. To punish the
offenders for a crime, involved in present
case, is in the interest of society, but, at the
same time, husband is taking care of his
wife and in case, husband is convicted and
sentenced for societal interest, then, wife
will be in great trouble and their future
would be ruined. It is also in the interest of
society to settle and resettle the family for
their welfare.

16. Considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, as noted herein
above, and also the submissions made by
the counsel for the parties, the court is of
the
considered
opinion
that
the
victim/opposite party no.3, herself, has
stated before this Court that she has
married the applicant out of her own sweet
will and is living happy married life. Out of
their wedlock, they are blessed with a male
child, who is presently four and half years
old. Therefore, no useful purpose shall be
served by prolonging the proceedings of
the above mentioned criminal case as the
parties have already settled their dispute.

17. Accordingly, the charge sheet
dated 25.06.2015 and the cognizance order
dated 30.07.2015 as well as the entire
proceedings of Criminal Case No. 36 of
2015 (State Vs. Rajiv Kumar), arising out
of Case Crime No.118 of 2015, under
Sections 363, 366 and 376 I.P.C. and
Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Doghat,
District-Baghpat, Additional District and
Sessions
Judge,
Baghpat
are
hereby
quashed.

18. The application is, accordingly,
allowed. There shall be no order as to
costs.

19. A copy of this order be certified to
the lower court forthwith.
----------
(2023) 3 ILRA 485
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 28.02.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE DINESH KUMAR SINGH, J.

Application U/S 482. No. 5106 of 2022
Along With
Other Connected Cases

Subesh Kumar Singh ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Opposite Party

Counsel for the Applicant:
S.M. Singh Royekwar, Sumeet Tahilramani

Counsel for the Opposite Party:
G.A., Anurag Kumar Singh, Narendra
Kumar Sharma, Romil Sagar

Criminal Law - Code of Criminal Procedure
- Sections 173 & 197-Allegations against
retired/serving public /police officers-who were
acting in discharge of their official duty when
investigation carried out-CBI filed closure reprt
after reaching to conclusion that it was suicideprotest petition-supplementary closure reportagain protest filed-Magistrate rejected second
final report-treated protest petition as complaint
case-no
prior
sanction
u/s
197
Cr.P.C.-
Magistrate should not have acted on guess of
the complainant- existence of overwhelming
material and compelling reasons is must before
summoning-complaint not disclose commission
of offence u/s302 and 120-B IPC-impugned
order set-aside.
Applications allowed. (E-9)
486 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
List of Cases cited:

1. D. Devaraja Vs Owais Sabeer Hussain, (2020)
7 SCC 695

2. Pepsi Foods Ltd. & anr. Vs Special Judicial
Magistrate & ors., (1998) 5 SCC 749

3. Mehmood Ul Rehman Vs Khazir Mohammad
Tunda & ors., (2015) 12 SCC 420

(Delivered by Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar
Singh, J.)

1. These seven petitioners under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as
the "CrPC") have been filed, impugning the
summoning order dated 07.07.2022 passed
by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate,
C.B.I., Lucknow in Complaint Case No.
3845 of 2019.

2. The facts, giving rise to these
petitioners briefly stated are that the
Government of India launched a scheme,
named and styled as 'National Rural Health
Mission' (hereinafter referred to as the
"NRHM") on 12.04.2003 with a view to
provide accessible, adequate and affordable
health service to all persons, particularly, to
vulnerable section of the society, residing
in
remote
areas.
The
separate
Memorandum of Understandings were
entered
into
between
the
Central
Government and the State Governments for
decentralizing the implementation of the
scheme and mobilizing the resources for
implementing the said scheme. Such a
Memorandum of Understanding with the
Government of Uttar Pradesh was entered
into on 12.11.2006. As per the said
Memorandum, 85% funds were to be
provided by the Central Government
whereas the State Government was to
contribute 15% of the total funds for the
Mission.

3.

The
State
Health
Society
(hereinafter referred to as the "SHS") was
established under the Chairmanship of
Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar
Pradesh and the existing State Agencies
involved in implementation of tuberculous,
blindness and leprosy eradication as well as
other State Empowered Committee for
RCH etc. were merged with he SHS.

4. On the allegation of large scale
bungling, misappropriation and cheating of
public funds, while implementing the
NRHM by the government officials, in
active connivance and conspiracy with
private persons, Public Interest Litigation
Petition Nos. 3611 (M/B) of 2011, 3301
(M/B) of 2011 and 2647 (M/B) of 2011
came to be filed. This Court vide order 15th
November, 2011 directed as under:-

".....................We are prima facie
convinced
that
gross
irregularities
financial and administrative appear to have
been committed in the execution and
implementation of NRHM including the
matter of award of contracts, procurement
of goods, article and etc. at various levels.

.................The
facts
and
circumstances, aforesaid make out a case
for reference to CBI for making a
preliminary enquiry in the affairs of NRHM
in the entire State of U.P. right from the
very inception of the NRHM.

We,
therefore,
direct
the
Director, CBI to conduct a preliminary
enquiry in the matter of execution and
implementation
of
the
NRHM
and
utilization of funds at various levels during
such implementation in the entire State of
U.P. and register regular case in respect of
persons
against
whom
prima
facie
3 All. Subesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
487
cognizable offence is made out and proceed
in accordance with law. The preliminary
enquiry shall be conducted from the period
commencing year 2005-06 till date....."

5. In compliance of the directions
issued by this Court, the CBI, after making
preliminary
inquiries,
registered
FIR
bearing
RC
No.01(A)/2012
dated
02.01.2012 in the matter of irregularities in
utilization of funds allocated to the UP
Small Scale Industries Corporation for
supply/procurement of various items under
the NRHM during the year 2009-2010.

6.

In
May,
2010,
the
State
Government of U.P. vide Government
Order No.1570/Sec-2-5-10-7(109) dated
05.05.2010 bifurcated the post of Chief
Medical Officer (hereinafter referred to as
the "CMO") into District Project Officer
(Family Welfare) and CMO (Health).
Considerable funds under NRHM Scheme
were placed at the disposal of the CMO
(Family Welfare) of various districts of
U.P. for procurement of medicines and
equipments, hiring contractual manpower
and
ambulances,
expenditure
on
information, education and communication
which included publicity through wallwritings,
banners,
posters
and
advertisements etc.

7. Dr. Y.S. Sachan had remained
posted as Deputy Chief Medical Officer in
the office of CMO, Lucknow from
26.07.2007 to 08.09.2010 when Dr. Anil
Kumar Shukla was working as CMO,
Lucknow. After bifurcation, Dr. A.K.
Shukla was posted as CMO (Health),
Lucknow, whereas on 15.05.2010 Dr.
Rajendra Prasad Kushwaha was posted as
District Project Officer (Family Welfare),
Lucknow. On 24.07.2010, Dr. Vinod
Kumar Arya (hereinafter referred to as
"V.K. Arya") was posted as successor of
Dr. Rajendra Prasad Kushwaha. Dr. Y.S.
Sachan was transferred from office of the
CMO (Health), Lucknow to the office of
District Project Officer (Family Welfare),
Lucknow vide Order No.1529/5-9-201009(221/10) dated 09.09.2010. In the month
of October, 2010, the post of District
Project Officer (Family Welfare) was redesignated as CMO (Family Welfare).

8. Dr. V.K. Arya was shot dead in the
morning of 27.10.2010, while he was
taking morning walk near his house at
Vikas
Nagar,
Lucknow
by
some
unidentified motorcycle borne assailants.
First
Information
Report
(hereinafter
referred to as the "FIR") vide Case Crime
No.0322 of 2010 was registered at Police
Station Vikas Nagar, Lucknow under
Section 302 IPC on the complaint of Dr.
(Smt) Shashi Kumari, wife of Dr. V.K.
Arya. In this case, local police initially
arrested Vijay Dubey, Abhay Singh, Anshu
Dixit, Amit Kumar Dixit and Ajay Mishra.
After murder, the charge of CMO (Family
Welfare), Lucknow was given to Dr. Y.S.
Sachan on 22.11.2010, who worked as Incharge CMO (Family Welfare), Lucknow
till 25.02.2011 in the absence of regular
CMO. During the Financial Year 20102011, a total amount of Rs. 32.49 Crores
were received by the Lucknow District
under different heads of NRHM Schemes
from State Health Society, out of which a
total amount of Rs.19.35 Crores were
spent. Dr. Y.S. Sachan, during his tenure as
In-charge
CMO
(Family
Welfare),
Lucknow, spent an amount of Rs. 8 Crores
21 Lac under different heads.

9. After murder of Dr. V.K. Arya, Dr.
B.P. Singh was posted as CMO (Family
Welfare), Lucknow on 25.02.2011 and Dr.
Y.S. Sachan continued to work as his
488 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Deputy
CMO.
In
the
morning
of
02.04.2011, Dr. B.P. Singh was also shot
dead by motorcycle borne unidentified
assailants near his house, while he was
taking morning walk in similar fashion as
was the case in committing murder of Dr.
V.K. Arya. In this regard, FIR vide Case
Crime No.0269 of 2011 dated 02.04.2011,
under Section 302 IPC was registered at
Police Station Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.
Investigation was taken up by SubInspector, Mr. Abhimanyu Dhar Dwivedi,
Sation
Officer.
On
04.04.2011,
Mr.
Abhimanyu Dhar Dwivedi, Station Officer
of Police Station Gomti Nagar and I.O of
the case examined Dr. Y.S. Sachan and
recorded his statement in order to get some
clue in murder case of Dr. B.P. Singh, but
without any success.

10. After murder of Dr. B.P. Singh on
02.04.2011, an FIR vide Case Crime
No.0112 of 2011 was registered at Police
Station
Wazirganj,
Lucknow
on
05.04.2011, under Sections 409, 419, 420,
467, 468 and 471 IPC against Dr. Y.S.
Sachan and two others for bungling,
misappropriation, cheating and forgery etc
of NRHM funds during the Financial Year
2010-2011. On 05.04.2011, Dr. Y.S.
Sachan was summoned in Crime Branch,
Hazratganj, Lucknow. Dr. Y.S. Sachan was
arrested on the same day in relation to Case
Crime No.0112 of 2011 and sent to District
Jail, Lucknow on 06.04.2011.

11. In view of murders of the two
CMOs, both the Ministers for Health and
Family Welfare resigned on 07.04.2011
and
Mr.
Pradeep
Shukla,
Principal
Secretary (Health) was also transferred on
the same day. Another FIR vide Case
Crime No.0115 of 2011 was also registered
at Police Station Wazirganj, Lucknow
under Sections 409, 419, 420, 467, 468 and
471 IPC on 07.04.2011 against Dr. Y.S.
Sachan
and
Dr.
A.K.
Shukla
for
misappropriation, bungling, cheating of
NRHM funds in CMO Office, Lucknow
during the Financial Year 2009-2010. Dr.
Y.S. Sachan remained in judicial custody
from 05.04.2011 to 06.04.2011. On account
of high blood pressure and diabetes, Dr.
Y.S. Sachan was admitted in District Jail
Hospital, Lucknow on 06.04.2011. On
08.04.2011, Dr. Y.S. Sachan was taken on
police custody remand for 48 hours in Case
Crime No.0112 of 2011 lodged at Police
Station Wajirganj, Lucknow, but again he
got hospitalized in Balrampur District
Hospital at 5.30 p.m. Dr. Y.S. Sachan was
discharged
from
Balrampur
District
Hospital on 10.04.2011 and sent to District
Jail, Lucknow where he was admitted in
District Jail Hospital and discharged on
11.04.2011. Dr. Y.S. Sachan was again
taken on police custody remand for one day
on 13.04.2011 in Case Crime No.0112 of
2011. The Jail Doctor, however, opined
that his police custody was subject to
clearance from the expert of Balrampur
District Hospital. Dr. Y.S. Sachan was
admitted in Balrampur District Hospital
and discharged on the next day i.e.
14.04.2011 and again sent back to District
Jail, Lucknow. Dr. Y.S. Sachan remained
hospitalized in District Jail Hospital,
Lucknow from 10.04.2011 to 11.04.2011,
from 16.04.2011 to 07.06.2011 and from
11.06.2011 to 22.06.2011 (till his death).

12. It would be relevant to take note
that after two months from initial arrest on
05.04.2011, when Dr. Y.S. Sachan was
again taken in police custody remand for 24
hours on 10.06.2011 in relation to Case
Crime No.0115 of 2011 lodged at Police
Station Wazirganj his statement was
recorded for the second time by the
Investigating Officer, Mr. Abhimanyu Dhar
3 All. Subesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
489
Dwivedi on 15.06.2011 in relation to Case
Crime No.0269 of 2011 lodged at Police
Station Gomti Nagar (Dr. B.P. Singh
murder case) after taking permission from
the Court. On 17.06.2011, Special Task
Force (hereinafter referred to as the "STF"),
Lucknow of U.P. Police arrested Anand
Prakash Tiwari, Ram Krishan Verma and
Vinod Sharma for murder of Dr. B.P. Singh
and
during
interrogation,
they
had
disclosed complicity of Dr. Y.S. Sachan in
the said case. On the same day i.e.
17.06.2011, in the evening, the then
Cabinet Secretary of Government of U.P.
convened a press conference and claimed
that the two CMOs were murdered at the
instance
of
Dr.
Y.S.
Sachan.
On
18.06.2011, Sub-Inspector, Mr. Abhimanyu
Dhar Dwivedi filed an application in the
Court
of
Chief
Judicial
Magistrate,
Lucknow for production of Dr. Y.S. Sachan
before the Court so that he might be
remanded in judicial custody in relation to
Case Crime No.0269 of 2011. Accordingly,
Dr. Y.S. Sachan was produced in the Court
of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow on
20.06.2011. Sub-Inspector, Mr. Abhimanyu
Dhar Dwivedi recorded further statement of
Dr. Y.S. Sachan on 21.06.2011 in District
Jail, Lucknow after permission from the
Court. On 22.06.2011, dead-body of Dr.
Y.S. Sachan was found on 1st Floor of
unused toilet of Jail Hospital, Lucknow. On
23.06.2011, Dr. Malti Sachan, wife of Dr.
Y.S. Sachan, sent a complaint to the Station
Officer,
Police
Station
Gosainganj,
Lucknow, alleging therein murder of her
husband on 22.06.2011 in Jail Hospital,
Lucknow. On the basis of the complaint
sent by Dr. Malti Sachan, wife of Dr. Y.S.
Sachan, FIR vide Case Crime No.0276 of
2011 dated 26.06.2011 was lodged against
unknown person(s) under Sections 120-B
and 302 IPC.

13. Dr. Malti Sachan, in her
complaint, alleged that on 05.04.2011 her
husband was summoned by the Wazirganj
Police, Lucknow for interrogation in the
case relating to large scale financial
irregularities
in
Family
Welfare
Department and that there appeared to be
involvement of high ranking officers.
Earlier two CMOs were also murdered. Her
husband was sent to prison pursuant to a
well-designed criminal conspiracy hatched by
the
responsible
officers
of
the
State
Government on the allegations of bungling of
Crores of rupees in Family Welfare
Department. Initially, there were allegations
of financial irregularities against him but later
on, he was also linked to the murders of Dr.
V.K. Arya and Dr. B.P. Singh, both were the
then CMOs (Family Welfare), Lucknow. On
23.06.2011, her husband was to appear in the
Court
and
he
could
have
disclosed
involvement of high influential persons in the
Government. Her husband was done to death
in a planned manner by inflicting grievous
injuries in order to shield the high influential
persons.

14. This Court vide order dated
14.07.2011
passed
in
Writ
Petition
No.6601 (M/B) of 2011 (PIL) filed by
(Sachchidanand Sachchay Vs. State of U.P.
and others) directed the CBI to investigate
reasons, circumstances and cause of death
of Dr. Y.S. Sachan. FIR vide Case Crime
No.0276 of 2011, lodged at Police Station
Gosaiganj,
was
re-registered
as
FIR
No.RC0532011S0004
of
2011,
under
Sections 302 and 120-B IPC, Police Station
CBI/SCB/Lucknow on 15.07.2011.

15. The CBI took cognizance
pursuant to the said order passed by this
Court in respect of death of Dr. Y.S.
Sachan.
490 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

16. As per statement recorded on
15.06.2011 by the Investigating Officer
(hereinafter referred to as the "IO"),
Abhimanyu Dhar Dwivedi, Dr. Y.S.
Sachan admitted his complicity in the
murder case of both the CMOs. In case of
Dr.V.K. Arya, he admitted that after
issuance of Government Orders dated
14.10.2010 and 18.10.2010 he was not
made second signatory to sign cheques by
Dr. V.K. Arya due to which he was not
getting any monetary benefit. In case of Dr.
B.P. Singh, he (Dr. Y.S. Sachan) admitted
that Dr. B.P. Singh had humiliated him for
various payments made during his tenure as
CMO (Family Welfare), Lucknow towards
hiring of vehicles, maintenance of official
buildings and hiring security guards etc. He
was also accused of making fraudulent
payment of Rs. 1.05 Lac to his associate,
Ram Krishna Verma. Dr. B.P. Singh was
bent upon fixing him for the financial
irregularities. He also visited house of Dr.
B.P. Singh to sort out the matter but in
vain. He confined ill-treatment meted out to
him at the hands of Dr. B.P. Singh to his
associate, Mr. Ram Krishna Verma, who
assured him that he would get rid of Dr.
B.P. Singh as was done in the case of Dr.
V.K. Arya.

17. The STF, Lucknow of UP Police
was working in tandem with Lucknow
Police to solve the murder cases of the two
CMOs. On 17.06.2011, the STF, Lucknow
arrested three accused persons, namely,
Ram Krishna Verma, Anand Prakash
Tiwari and Vinod Sharma for their
involvement in the murder of Dr. B.P.
Singh. During interrogation, the trio
admitted before the STF that both the
CMOs were murdered at the instance of Dr.
Y.S. Sachan and thereafter the Cabinet
Secretary, Government of U.P., in the
evening of 17.06.2011, held a press
conference and said that as per the police
investigation both the CMOs (Dr. V. K.
Arya and Dr. B. P. Singh) were murdered
at the instance Dr. Y.S. Sachan. The said
conference was given wide coverage by
both Electronic and Print Media.

18. It is said that as per police
statement of Dr. Y.S. Sachan recorded on
21.06.2011, Ram Krishna Verma, friend of
Dr. Y.S. Sachan, introduced him to Anand
Prakash Tiwari. Anand Prakash Tiwari was
offered Rs. 7 Lac for committing murder of
Dr.B.P. Singh. Anand Prakash Tiwari was
given Rs.50,000/- as an advance for the
job. Dr. Y.S. Sachan took Anand Prakash
Tiwari to his office and showed him the
target i.e. Dr. B.P. Singh. He also provided
residential address to Dr. B.P. Singh to
Anand Prakash Tiwari and showed his
house to him. Dr. Y.S. Sachan was not
talking to his accomplices over phone to
chalk out the strategy but would convey the
modalities through Ram Krishna Verma or
in person. In the morning of 02.04.2011,
Anand Prakash Tiwari came to him to
collect
the
remaining
amount
after
committing the murder of Dr. B.P. Singh.
Anand Prakash Tiwari handed over him the
pistol used in commission of the crime,
which Dr. Y.S. Sachan concealed in his
office and was ready to get it recovered to
the police.

19. The CBI, in its investigation, in
respect of death of Dr. Y.S. Sachan, found
that on 22.06.2011, while locking the jail in
the evening, Dr. Y.S. Sachan was found
missing. On being searched, his dead-body
was found at about 20.15 hours under
mysterious circumstances on 1st floor in an
unused toilet of minor operation theater of
the
jail
hospital
which
was
under
construction. There were cut-marks on his
body, and a leather belt was found tied
3 All. Subesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
491
around his neck. Buckle end of the belt was
found entangled in the ventilator of toilet.
The dead-body was taken out from the
toilet and kept in the corridor at 1st floor
for examination by doctor of jail hospital.
On examination, Dr. V.V. Tripathi declared
him dead at about 20.30 hours. The
information was given to the Station
Officer, Police Station Gosaiganj, Lucknow
about death of Dr. Y.S. Sachan and the
inquest proceedings were conducted by Mr.
Jitendra
Srivastava,
Tehsildar,
Mohanlalganj on the same day. The inquest
proceedings were conducted from 23:15
hours of 22.06.2011 to 01:30 hours of
23.06.2011. After inquest proceedings got
concluded FSL Team, comprising of the
experts from biology, serology, physics,
ballistics, photography and their supporting
staff reached at the spot and sniffer dogs
were also pressed into service. The place of
occurrence
and
dead-body
were
photographed and video recorded by the
experts of the FSL, Lucknow in the night of
22/23.06.2011.

20. A panel of doctors was constitute
for conducting autopsy. As per postmortem
report, there were 8 antemortem incised
wounds and one postmortem ligature mark
on neck of body of Dr. Y.S. Sachan. Cause
of death was opined to be shock and
hemorrhage.

21. The FSL submitted its report
dated 18.07.2011 regarding inspection of
scene of occurrence on 22.06.2011 and
23.06.2011 and as per the FSL report a
leather belt was found tied around the neck
of the deceased with a slipping knot, blood
was spread all over the floor of the toilet
and clotted. One plastic bottle, half filled
with water like liquid, was also fond on the
door of the toilet, blood was detected on the
iron rod of the ventilator and also recovered
one half shaving blade under questionable
circumstances.

22. Dr. B.S. Arora, Additional
Director and Dr. S.C. Mittal, Joint Director,
State
Forensic
Medicine
Experts,
Government of U.P. vide their report dated
22.07.2011 opined that the death of Dr.
Y.S. Sachan did not appear to be a case of
suicide.

23. The CBI, during the course of
investigation, requisitioned the services of
experts of CFSL, CBI, New Delhi, along
with Dr. T.D. Dogra, Professor & Head,
Department of Forensic Medicine and
Toxicology,
AIIMS,
New-Delhi.
The
experts collected certain samples from the
scene of occurrence and the place was also
photographed.
During
inspection,
jail
hospital premises was also searched to
trace any physical clue/chance, however,
nothing incriminating was found. Dr. M.S.
Dahiya,
Deputy
Director,
FSL,
Gandhinagar, Gujarat also inspected the
place of occurrence. CCTV footage of
cameras installed in District Jail, Lucknow
were scanned/scrutinized for movement of
any person and vehicle.

24. The CBI sought constitution of a
medical board of experts at AIIMS, NewDelhi for opinion on the nature of injuries
and cause of death. Expert opinion of the
hand-writing
experts
of
documents
seized/recovered during investigation was
also sought. Polygraph examination of
suspected persons was conducted.

25. The Medical Board of AIIMS,
New-Delhi was of the opinion that the
deceased could have first attempted to kill
himself by inflicting incised wounds on the
known suicidal sites where arteries and
veins were situated i.e. writs, elbow, neck
492 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
and inguinal region. The injuries inflicted
did not cut any artery or vein instead of
superficial veins were cut from which there
was bleeding, but it was very slow. Hence,
after sometime, when the deceased realized
that the injuries were not killing him fast,
he could have attempted to hang himself
with the help of belt in which he had
succeeded and, therefore, the immediate
cause of death in this case was asphyxia as
a result of hanging associated with the
bleeding from the injuries inflicted. This
observation was made by the Board of
Doctors
of
AIIMS,
New-Delhi
after
perusing/examining
postmortem
report,
video
recording
of
postmortem
examination and photographs of dead-body
and
place
of
occurrence
taken
on
22/23.06.2011-. The Board answered the
questions framed by the CBI in detail
which is part of the investigation report of
the CBI.

26. As many as seven jail officials
and one Ajmat Ullah Beg, convict, who
was working in Jail Hospital, were
subjected to polygraph examination and
they denied their involvement in any foul
play relating to murder of Dr. Y.S. Sachan,
and the CBI did not find their involvement
on any of the material issues. The CBI,
after analyzing its evidence and opinion of
the experts, was of the view that the
deceased had committed suicide.

27. The final/closure report submitted
under Section 173(2) CrPC by the CBI had
included
the
detailed
scientific
investigation with the help of experts
carried bout by the CBI which runs into
several pages and on the basis of the said
detailed scientific investigation, the CBI
had concluded that Dr. Y.S. Sachan had
committed suicide, and it was not a case of
homicidal death. The closure report would
also disclose that
the experts, who
conducted serological autopsy in respect of
death of Dr. Y.S. Sachan had found that Dr.
Y.S.
Sachan
was
under
tremendous
pressure/stress after
seeing newspaper
reports dated 18.06.2011 wherein his
involvement in murder of two CMOs was
widely reported. He was highly disturbed
and shown less interest in eating food after
18.06.2011. His blood pressure was very
high. He had written typical suicide note,
which was recovered among his belongings
on the date of incident, suggests that it was
in his hand-writing. The injuries would
suggest self-inflicted one, specially in
absence of definite wounds.

28. The CBI also investigated the
procedure/practice
for
locking
and
unlocking jail and counting of inmates and
jail staff in District Jail, Lucknow and
actual events in this regard on 22.06.2011.

29. It is mentioned in the report that
Dr. Y.S. Sachan was present in Ward No. 2
at the time of unlocking of jail at 6 hours
on 22.06.2011. He used to wake up early in
morning for morning walk. On the date of
incident, he was seen in the ward in the
morning by co-inmates, namely, Furkan,
Ramkpal Verma and Kailash. Inmate
Shripal Verma had seen Dr. Y.S. Sachan
going out of Ward No. 2 with water bottle
in his hand. Inmate, Ram Pal Verma who
was allotted Bed No. 14 in Ward No. 2 had
seen Dr. Y.S. Sachan washing/cleaning his
face. He collected water in the bottle at
about 7.30 hours in morning of 22.06.2011.
Dr. Y.S. Sachan was wearing pant and
shirt.

30. During evening counting and
locking of the jail hospital, when strength
of inmates was communicated by the Head
Warder, Mr. Babu Ram Dubey to the
3 All. Subesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
493
Control Room, Chief Head Warder on duty
detected discrepancy of shortage of one
inmate of Jail Hospital. Control Room
informed the same to Mr. Babu Ram
Dubey and called him in Control Room.
When Mr. Babu Ram Dubey pointed out
about Dr. Y.S. Sachan went on remand, he
was asked about the slip issued by the
office of Deputy Jailer, Under Trial
Section, for sending Dr. Y.S. Sachan on
remand. On search, the said slip was not
found available. When this fact was crosschecked from office of Deputy Jailer
(Under Trial) and main gate, it was
confirmed that Dr. Y.S. Sachan was not
sent on remand on 22.06.2011. Thereafter,
search was started for tracing Dr. Y.S.
Sachan out.

31. While searching Dr. Y.S. Sachan
in this jail hospital premises, the Head
Warder, Mr. Babu Ram Dubey went to 1st
floor of jail hospital and he found door of
the unused toilet attached with the
operation theater partly opened. He pushed
the door and found a person in sitting
posture above the commode of the toilet.
The 1st floor of the jail hospital had no
electricity supply, but there was visibility
due to percolation of lights through glass
window panes of the operation theater and
toilet ventilator. Head Warder Babu Ram
Dubey shouted from 1st floor that Dr. Y.S.
Sachan had been found in toilet. On
hearing shouts of Mr. Dubey, Mr. Bhimsen
Mukund along with Warder Dan Singh and
others rushed to 1st floor of the jail
hospital.

32. On reaching 1st floor, Mr. Bhimsen
Mukund checked inside the toilet. Dr. Y.S.
Sachan was taken out from toilet and his
body was kept in corridor. Dr. V.V. Tripathi,
after examination, declared him dead. The
information was given over phone to Mr.
V.K. Gupta, IGP (Jail Administration &
Reform Services); Mr. Anil Sagar, District
Magistrate, Lucknow; Mr. D.K. Thakur,
DIG, Lucknow; FSL, Lucknow and to the
Station Officer of Police Station Gosaiganj
by
Mr.
S.H.M.
Rizvi,
Senior
Jail
Superintendent. Sniffer dogs reached to the
spot.

33. On receiving information, Mr. V.K.
Gupta, IGP (Jail Administration & Reform
Services);
Mr.
Anil
Sagar,
District
Magistrate, Lucknow; Mr. D.K. Thakur,
DIG, Lucknow; experts of FSL and others
reached to the spot and inspected the site.
Inquest proceedings were conducted by Mr.
Jitendra Srivastava, Tehsildar, Mohanlalganj.
Mr. V.K. Gupta made inquiries from inmates
of Ward No. 2. Thereafter, he searched
personal belongings of Dr. Y.S. Sachan lying
on the side steel rack of his bed. He took out
a note/paper from the belongings of Dr. Y.S.
Sachan and after perusing it kept the same in
his pocket. Thereafter, Mr. V.K. Gupta again
went to 1st floor and read out contents of the
said note to someone over phone. Some
contents of the note were also overheard by
Mr. J.P. Srivastava. During examination, Mr.
J.P. Srivastava stated that he overheard that
"mujhe apne parivar se koi shikayat nahi hai,
na hi karagar ke adhikariyo se"

34.

Mr.
V.K.
Gupta,
in
the
intervening night of 22/23.06.2011 gave a
brief
interview
to
electronic
media
regarding death of Dr. Y.S. Sachan, and he
told that note/paper which could be said to
be suicide note was found. Something
written by hand had been found but till
hand-writing was examined and other
things were not verified, nothing definite
could be said about it.

35. The Lucknow Police was under
tremendous pressure to solve the murder
494 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
case of Dr. B.P. Singh, therefore, various
teams were formed and assigned the task of
working
out
the
cases.
One
team,
comprising of Inspectors, Mr. Anil Singh
and D.K. Shahi and Sub-Inspector, K.N.
Singh was also formed under supervision
of the then IGP, Lucknow Zone, Lucknow
for the said purpose. Dr. Y.S. Sachan was
taken on remand for 24 hours by SubInspector, Mr. Shajaur Rahim in 2nd
NRHM Scam (Case Crime No.115 of 2011,
lodged at Police Station Wazirganj) in the
morning of 10.06.2011. In the intervening
night of 10/11/06/2011, he was taken to
Police Station Chinhat where he was
interrogated by team of Inspector, Mr. Anil
Singh and others. In the morning of
11.06.2011, he was lodged back at District
Jail, Lucknow where he was again
interrogated by Inspector, Mr. Anil Singh
and Sub-Inspector, Mr. K.N. Singh.

36. During interrogation, Dr. Y.S.
Sachan gave a hand-written note/letter
meant to be given to Dr. A.K. Shukla, to
Inspector, Mr. Anil Singh, who in turn
handed over the said letter to Mr. Subeh
Kumar Singh, the then IGP, Lucknow
Zone, Lucknow. During investigation, the
said letter was produced by Mr. Subesh
Kumar Singh before the CBI. The letter
dated 11.06.2011 written by Dr. Y.S.
Sachan addressed to Dr. A.K. Shukla
would read as "CMO Dr. A.K. Shukla mai
jail me bahut pareshan go gaya hon. Mere
pariwar ki halat kharab hai. Ap ne meri
kuchh madad nihi kiya. Agar aap ne madad
nahi ki to agli remand ki tarikh par police
va midia to bata donga ki dono CMO ki
hatya apne karwaya hai. Mere parivar ki
suraksha ka dhyan rakhiyega. Apka".

37. The said note would indicate that
both Dr. Y.S. Sachan and Dr. A.K. Shukla
were privy to murder of both the CMOs.

38.
 The CBI
concluded
after
thorough,
detailed
and
scientific
investigation from all angles, including the
opinion of the experts, that no evidence had
come on record indicating death of Dr. Y.S.
Sachan in jail hospital on 22.06.2011 to be
a homicide and no evidence could come,
pointing out presence of second person on
1st floor of the toilet of jail hospital. The
evidence collected during investigation,
included statements of witnesses, expert
opinion of Board of Directors of AIIMS,
New-Delhi, the reports of CFSL experts
including
biological
reports,
physics,
fingerprint, hand-writing experts, chemical
examiner & forensic psychologist all of
which indicated that Dr. Y.S. Sachan had
committed suicide.

39.

The
evidence
included
circumstantial evidence which emerged
during investigation revealed that Dr. Y.S.
Sachan was extremely disturbed and
stressed after disclosure of his complicity
in the murder cases of CMOs and he even
stopped taking meals. The opinion of the
Board of Doctors of AIIMS, New-Delhi
that the cause of death in case of Dr. Y.S.
Sachan was antemortem hanging associated
with multiple suicidal wounds was also
fully got corroborated by the oral as well as
documentary evidence which came on
record during investigation. There was
some omissions and commissions on the
part of Pahender Singh the then warder and
Babu Ram Dubey the then head warder for
failing to do actual head count of inmates
and maintain correct entries as well as
failure on the part of Mr. V.K. Gupta then
then IGP (Jail Administration and Reform
Services) for bringing on record the note
written by Dr. Y.S. Sachan and causing
disappearance of the same in view of which
matter was taken up by the CBI with the
Government of Uttar Pradesh for taking an
3 All. Subesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
495
appropriate departmental action against
them.

40.

The
closure
report
dated
27.09.2012 was filed by CBI under Section
173 (2) CrPC after reaching to the
conclusion that death of Dr. Y.S. Sachan
was not homicide, but suicide. The
complainant filed a protest petition alleging
therein various gaps in the investigation
and prayed for further investigation.

41. The CBI filed reply to the protest
petition, however, the learned Magistrate
vide order dated 22.02.2013 directed the
CBI for further investigation of the offence.

42. The CBI undertook the further
investigation and filed a supplementary
closure report after investigating all the
aspects highlighted in the order of learned
Magistrate as well as on each of the
allegations made by the complainant in the
said protest petition; viz. (i) the injuries
were not self-inflicted (ii) recovery of blade
doubtful (iii) difference of opinion between
panel of Board of Forensic Medicine
Experts, AIIMS and panel of Doctors who
conducted postmortem examination (iv) no
proper investigation on belt (v) no report on
the surgical knife taken by the police from
the pharmacist (vi) statements under
Section 161 CrPC of Anil Kumar Singh
and petitioner, Subesh Kumar Singh, which
were recorded for the note in question (vii)
CBI's approach had been abinitio towards
the conclusion as a case of suicide (viii)
CJM inquiry report; and (ix) second
opinion from Board of Experts (AIIMS).

43. The complainant was not satisfied
even with the supplementary closure report
and again filed a protest petition for
summoning of seven accused persons (the
petitioners) for trial of murder of Dr. Y.S.
Sachan and for causing disappearance of
evidence.

44. The CBI filed reply to the protest
petition.

45. The learned Magistrate vide order
dated 19.11.2019 had rejected the second
final report, treating the protest petition as a
complaint
case.
The
statement
of
complainant, Malti Sachan got recorded
under Section 200 CrPC and statement of
six witnesses got recorded under Section
202 CrPC. Thereafter, the impugned order
was passed, summoning the petitioners to
face trial under Section 302 read with
Section 120-B IPC.

46. The petitioners are Ex-serving
government servants. There is no prior
sanction under Section 197 CrPC. Absence
of sanction, as mandated under Section 197
CrPC,
would
otherwise
vitiate
the
impugned order. In sum & substance, the
allegation is for disappearance of evidence.

47. In the case reported in (2020) 7
SCC 695 (D. Devaraja Vs. Owais Sabeer
Hussain), in respect of police officer
(accused of offence), while discharging
duties, has held in paragraphs 65 to 75,
which read as under:-

"65. The law relating to the
requirement of sanction to entertain and/or
take cognizance of an offence, allegedly
committed by a police officer under Section
197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
read with Section 170 of the Karnataka
Police Act, is well settled by this Court,
inter alia by its decisions referred to above.

66. Sanction of the Government,
to prosecute a police officer, for any act
related to the discharge of an official duty,
is imperative to protect the police officer
496 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
from
facing
harassive,
retaliatory,
revengeful and frivolous proceedings. The
requirement
of
sanction
from
the
Government, to prosecute would give an
upright police officer the confidence to
discharge his official duties efficiently,
without fear of vindictive retaliation by
initiation of criminal action, from which he
would be protected under Section 197 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, read with
Section 170 of the Karnataka Police Act. At
the same time, if the policeman has
committed a wrong, which constitutes a
criminal offence and renders him liable for
prosecution, he can be prosecuted with
sanction from the appropriate Government.

67. Every offence committed by a
police officer does not attract Section 197
of the Code of Criminal Procedure read
with Section 170 of the Karnataka Police
Act. The protection given under Section
197 of the Criminal Procedure Code read
with Section 170 of the Karnataka Police
Act has its limitations. The protection is
available only when the alleged act done by
the public servant is reasonably connected
with the discharge of his official duty and
official duty is not merely a cloak for the
objectionable act. An offence committed
entirely outside the scope of the duty of the
police officer, would certainly not require
sanction. To cite an example, a policeman
assaulting a domestic help or indulging in
domestic violence would certainly not be
entitled to protection. However, if an act is
connected to the discharge of official duty
of investigation of a recorded criminal
case, the act is certainly under colour of
duty, no matter how illegal the act may be.

68. If in doing an official duty a
policeman has acted in excess of duty, but
there is a reasonable connection between
the act and the performance of the official
duty, the fact that the act alleged is in
excess of duty will not be ground enough to
deprive the policeman of the protection of
the government sanction for initiation of
criminal action against him.

69. The language and tenor of
Section 197 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure
and
Section
170
of
the
Karnataka Police Act makes it absolutely
clear that sanction is required not only for
acts done in discharge of official duty, it is
also required for an act purported to be
done in discharge of official duty and/or
act done under colour of or in excess of
such duty or authority.

70. To decide whether sanction is
necessary, the test is whether the act is
totally unconnected with official duty or
whether there is a reasonable connection
with the official duty. In the case of an act
of a policeman or any other public servant
unconnected with the official duty there can
be no question of sanction. However, if the
act alleged against a policeman is
reasonably connected with discharge of his
official duty, it does not matter if the
policeman has exceeded the scope of his
powers and/or acted beyond the four
corners of law.

71.