SANJEEV Vs. STATE
LAWS(DLH)-2009-5-256
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on
May 20,2009
SANJEEV
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
ROWLANDS V. HAMILTON [REFERRED TO]HUSSAINARA KHATOON V. HOME SECRETARY,STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK SADASHIV ASTIKAR V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
DEEPA BAJWA V. STATE [REFERRED TO]
HERBERT BELL V. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS [REFERRED TO]
STATE V. DR. NARAYAN WAMAN [REFERRED TO]
KURBAN HASSEIN MOHAMMEDALLI RANGAWALLA V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
NAZIR AHMAD V. KING EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
NEHRU JAIN V. STATE [REFERRED TO]
VIKRAMJIT SINGH V. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
SUNDERLAL VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
TRIMBAK VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SADHU SINGH HAMAM SINGH VS. STATE OF PEPSU [REFERRED TO]
PRITAM SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWAN DAS VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
SARWAN SINGH RATTAN SINGH HARBANS SINGH BHAN SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
TORI SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. SINGHARA SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. JUGININDER LAL [REFERRED TO]
BHALCHANDRA WAMAN PATHE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
SULEMAN RAHIMAN MULANI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
BACHUBHAI HASSANALLI KARYANI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
MAHADEOHARILOKRS VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISH CHANDER VS. STATE OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
JAMUNA CHAUDHARY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
CHAND BATRA VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
DATAR SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
RAM KUMAR PANDEY VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. HAIDARALI KALUBHAI [REFERRED TO]
MANEKA GANDHI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
DILBAG SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
SURENDRA KUMAR VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
DUDH NATH PANDEY VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. KALKI [REFERRED TO]
GAMBHIR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
SARABJEET SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SHARAD BIRDHICHAND SARDA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
KEISAM KUMAR SINGH VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [REFERRED TO]
MUKUND LAL MOHINDER SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRAN SURENDRAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
JAI PRAKASH VS. STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. P P SHARMA IAS [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL REHMAN ANTULAY VS. R S NAYAK [REFERRED TO]
SAKHARAM VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
DHANANJOY CHATTERJEE ALIAS DHANA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
RAMSINH BAVAJI JADEJA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. BABUL NATH [REFERRED TO]
ABANI KANTA RAY VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. GURDIP SINGH [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISH NARAIN VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. SATISH [REFERRED TO]
UDAY KUMAR VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
RAM SARAN MAHTO VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
R SARALA VS. T S VELU [REFERRED TO]
JAGJIT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
DALBIR SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMAD AYNUDDIN ALIAS MIYAM VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
GURA SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. NABI DIN [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. SHARANAPPA BASNAGOUDA AREGOUDAR [REFERRED TO]
P RAMACHANDRA RAO VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
SURAJ BHAN VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
BALDEV SINGH VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. PRAFUL B DESAI [REFERRED TO]
MARUTI RAMA NAIK VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
DAMODAR VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
SHANKAR NARAYAN BHADOLKAR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. SANJAY RAI [REFERRED TO]
ZAHIRA HABIBULLA H SHEIKH VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
RAM BALI VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. FARID KHAN [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF M P VS. DHARKOLE GOVIND SINGH [REFERRED TO]
SATYAJIT BANERJEE VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
THANGAIYA VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
SIDHARTH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
RATHNASHALVAN VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
PRABHAKARAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
HIMANSHU SINGH SABHARWAL VS. STATE OF M P [REFERRED TO]
RAJBIR SINGH DALAL VS. CHAUDHARI DEVI LAL UNIVERSITY [REFERRED TO]
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KARNATAKA VS. B SRINIVAS [REFERRED TO]
BALWAN VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
NARESH KUMAR VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL SUBHAN VS. STATE OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF DELHI VS. SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. IBRAHIM MOHMAD [REFERRED TO]
LONGPOKALAKPAM V. STATE [REFERRED TO]
BAIJ NATH PRASAD VS. MADAN MOHAN DAS [REFERRED TO]
LALU VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
THIMMIAH VS. STATE OF MYSORE [REFERRED TO]
NARAYANAN NAIR VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
RAJAVALSE M VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. AMMINI [REFERRED TO]
SAIDU MOHAMMED VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
MANIK CHAND VS. BHUBNESHWAR PRASAD [REFERRED TO]
TUMAHOLE BERENG VS. KING [REFERRED TO]
CORA LILLIAN MCPHERSON VS. ORAN LEO MCPHERSON [REFERRED TO]
BABA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J. -
(1.)The increase in vehicular traffic alongwith the population of Delhi has grown much faster since the time Maruti Company has flooded the
market with their brand of cars for the middle class of the society.
Although the capital of the country is dominated by the middle and lower
class, but the presence of rich and affluent is no less visible when one
looks at the roads of Delhi to find large number of high class luxurious
cars, including the Mercedes and BMWs. The traditional mode of travelling
by tangas, bicycles, rickshaws, two wheelers is coming to gradual extinct
except in the interiors of some localities.
(2.)EXCEPT for a few hours between midnight to dawn, one cannot see even a patch of earth but vehicles and vehicles either running or stranded in traffic jams on Delhi roads. This ever increasing vehicular explosion in traffic is due to the rapid increase of human population primarily due to continuous migration of people in search of their livelihood from adjoining states and from far flung areas. In this unmanageable crowd, what we have lost is humanity, morals, our age old rich culture, tradition, ethos and path of truthfulness and righteousness as shown to us by saints and scriptures. Of all the maladies afflicting India, the malady of inner decay reigns supreme. There is a weakening of our moral fibre and ethical values. Corruption, red tapism, callousness, casualness and crumbling moralities dominate our public life instead of much needed culture of care, compassion, empathy, and catholicity.
Drunken driving, insensitivity and apathy of the Government for public safety on roads; poor, faulty and ill equipped police investigation; growing interference of media in criminal trials; media hype; hostile and dishonest witnesses; falling standards of legal profession, filthy use of money power by rich and mighty; unholy nexus between defence counsel and State appointed Special Public Prosecutors are some of the issues that cropped up in this infamous case known as the BMW case.
(3.)IN this background, it would be relevant to briefly put forth the facts of the case before delving upon the contentions of counsel for the parties, which are as under:
(2.)EXCEPT for a few hours between midnight to dawn, one cannot see even a patch of earth but vehicles and vehicles either running or stranded in traffic jams on Delhi roads. This ever increasing vehicular explosion in traffic is due to the rapid increase of human population primarily due to continuous migration of people in search of their livelihood from adjoining states and from far flung areas. In this unmanageable crowd, what we have lost is humanity, morals, our age old rich culture, tradition, ethos and path of truthfulness and righteousness as shown to us by saints and scriptures. Of all the maladies afflicting India, the malady of inner decay reigns supreme. There is a weakening of our moral fibre and ethical values. Corruption, red tapism, callousness, casualness and crumbling moralities dominate our public life instead of much needed culture of care, compassion, empathy, and catholicity.
Drunken driving, insensitivity and apathy of the Government for public safety on roads; poor, faulty and ill equipped police investigation; growing interference of media in criminal trials; media hype; hostile and dishonest witnesses; falling standards of legal profession, filthy use of money power by rich and mighty; unholy nexus between defence counsel and State appointed Special Public Prosecutors are some of the issues that cropped up in this infamous case known as the BMW case.
(3.)IN this background, it would be relevant to briefly put forth the facts of the case before delving upon the contentions of counsel for the parties, which are as under:
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.