Top News

Delhi’s Rouse Avenue Court acquitted all the surviving accused in a major verdict in one of the oldest pending criminal cases in the country. This case was to alleged manipulation and fake entries in the documents of Rashtrapati Bhavan. The investigation of which started about three decades ago. Additional Judicial Magistrate Jyoti Maheshwari acquitted Mohan Lal Jatia, Ashok Jatia and Ashok Jain of all charges.

They were facing serious charges like criminal conspiracy, making fake documents and tampering with evidence. Two other accused in this case, Milap Chand Jagotra and Gurcharan Singh, had died during the hearing. Therefore the proceedings against him had already been dropped.

This case pertains to the year 1986, when Mohan Lal Jatia was detained under the COFEPOSA law. Challenging his arrest, Jatia had said in the court that he had sent an application to the President but no action was taken on it. This is where doubt arose in the whole matter. It was alleged that an attempt was made to show that the application had been received by making a fake entry in the records of the President’s Secretariat. The matter reached the Supreme Court and in the year 1994, the Supreme Court ordered the CBI to investigate this entire matter.

The CBI and the prosecution said that the entry shown in the postal register of the President’s Secretariat was inserted later and was not genuine. Some witnesses also said that the entry looks suspicious and could be fake. Forensic report was also presented.

The court clearly said in its decision that the entire matter was based only on suspicion and conjecture, there was no concrete evidence. The court said that the prosecution could not prove that the accused actually committed any fraud or hatched a conspiracy. The court also said that it could not be proved whether the application was sent to the President or not. In such a situation, the allegation that the accused gave wrong information is also not proved.

The court also expressed concern that the case continued for too long. The judge said that if the trial had been completed quickly, perhaps more evidence would have come to light and the truth would have become clear. The court said that the crime against the accused is not proved on the basis of evidence on record. Therefore, they are acquitted by giving them the benefit of doubt.