In

The Court of C.J.M.

Gaya.

Complaint Case No …… / 2019

Name and address of the Complainant.

1. Ven. Ratneswar Chakma, General Secretary, Buddhist Thai-Bharat

Society, Bodhgaya, Dist. Gaya, Bihar.

2. Gaisar Paswan, S/o. Late Nanhak Paswan, R/o. Purani Taridh, P.O.

Bodhgaya, Dist. Gaya, Bihar.

Name and address of the accused person.

1. Mr. Raman Kumar Chaudhary, Dy.S.P. Bodhgaya, Dist. Gaya, Bihar.

2. Mr. Krishna Kumar Pandey, S/o. ………………. R/o. vill. Mastpura,

P.S. Bodhgaya, Dist. Gaya, Bihar.

Name and address of witnesses

1
1.

2. Other witness shall be cited later on.

Date, time and Place of occurrence:

On, 14.01.2019, near Bodhgaya Masjid, as well as Bodhgaya Police

station, Gaya at 1:45 pm to 7:00 pm.

Office committed u/s 323, 341, 325, 307, 384, 504, 506, 379/34 of I.P.C.

and Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The humble complaint petition filed on

behalf of the complainant aforesaid.

Most respectfully showeth: -

1. That the complainant No. 1. is General Secretary of Buddhist-Thai

Bharat Society, Bodhgaya, belonging to Scheduled Tribe and

complainant No. 2. is his employee belonging to Scheduled Caste.

2. That the above mentioned date, time and place of local Dy.S.P. Mr.

Raman Kumar Chaudhary and one Mr. Krishna Kumar Pandey of

village Mastpura, P.S. Bodhgaya, who is land mafia and also accused

in P.S. Case No. ………………………. . He is also habitual criminal

and sent to jail in P.S. Case No. ……. by ………. Court.

2
 The above mentioned Case against

Mr. Krishna Kumar Pandey is

annexed herewith as Annexure A.

3. That Mr. Gaisar Paswan was abducted by accused No. 1. from near

Bodhgaya Masjid, where his wife sells ground nuts etc. He went there

from Society Temple at lunch break to help his wife when his wife

came home to have lunch. The accused No. 2. Mr. Krishna Kumar

Pandey came there and taken ground nuts of Rs 10/- (Ten) but given

complainant No. 2. Rs. 2000/- (Two thousands) instead of Rs 10/-

(Ten), Mr. Paswan told accused No.2. that he don’t have change later

on accused No. 2. asked from one of his friend who was accompanying

him. In the meantime accused No. 1. arrive there with his police squad

in 4 wheeler bearing registration No. ………………. Mr. Krishna

Kumar Pandey gave signal to accused No. 1. that he is Mr. Gaisar

Paswan.

4. That Complainant No. 2. was threatened by the police personnel and

ready to face the consequences if he refuse to go in police station with

them. Mr. Paswan was seated forcibly in the police vehicle and taken

to Bodhgaya Police Station. He was beaten, mentally abused,

3
 physically tortured and assaulted badly by the constables at the

instruction of accused No. 1. They brutally beaten up the complainant

No.2. and also taken his signatures and his wife signature on a blank

paper for illegal purpose. Not only this accused No. 2. also demanded

ransom 50,000/- (fifty thousands) from him and his Bhante, i.e.

Complainant No. 1. and the constables also demanded Rs 10,000/- (ten

thousands) each to release him from the station. Complainant No. 2.

also threatened to face dire consequences and implicit him in false case

like Murder and Rape, if he do not make statement against the Society.

5. That Complainant No.2. got treated in P.H.C. Bodhgaya as he

sustained grievous injury in different parts of his body.

Prescription of P.H.C. Bodhgaya

and 6 (Six) photographs is

annexed herewith for your ready

reference and legal action as

Annexure B.

6. That, the reason behind the alleged occurrence is falsely and baselessly

assigned by Dy.S.P, in order to make false statement in a false case

filed by one Reena Devi. Complainant No.2. is being poor and

4
 innocent poor staff of the abovesaid society. An innocent and

backward Scheduled caste person was badly suffered for nothing.

7. That, the accused No. 2. has violated Article 20 and 21 of the

Constitution of India, abuses the power of a public servant and violated

the police manuals by detaining Complainant. No. 2. Illegally.

“In the case of D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal

(AIR 1997 SC 610), the Supreme Court laid down

detailed guidelines to be followed by the central

and state investigating agencies in all cases of

arrest and detention till legal provisions are made

in that behalf as preventive measures and held

that any form of torture or cruel inhuman or

degrading treatment, whether it occurs during

interrogation, investigation or otherwise, falls

within the ambit of Article 21”.

“D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal; [(1997) 1

SCC 416] states that, How do we check the abuse

of police power? Transparency of action and

accountability perhaps are two possible

safeguards which this Court must insist upon.

5
Attention is also required to be paid to properly

develop work culture, training and orientation of

the police force consistent with basic human

values. Training methodology of the police needs

restructuring. The force needs to be infused with

basic human values and made sensitive to the

constitutional ethos. Efforts must be made to

change the attitude and approach of the police

personnel handling investigations so that they do

not sacrifice basic human values during

interrogation and do not resort to questionable

forms of interrogation. With a view to bring in

transparency, the presence of the counsel of the

arrestee at some point of time during the

interrogation may deter the police from using

third-degree methods during interrogation.

Article 21 of the Constitution provides “no

person shall be deprived of his life or personal

liberty except according to procedure established

by law”. This Court has stated time and again

6
that Article 21 confers sacred and cherished right

under the Constitution which cannot be violated,

except according to procedure established by

law. Article 21 guarantees personal liberty to

every single person in the country which includes

the right to live with human dignity.

In line with the guarantee provided by Article

21 and other provisions in the Constitution of

India, a number of statutory provisions also seek

to protect personal liberty, dignity and basic

human rights. In spite of Constitutional and

statutory provisions aimed at safeguarding the

personal liberty and life of a citizen, the cases of

death in police encounters continue to occur. This

Court has been confronted with encounter cases

from time to time. In Chaitanya Kalbagh3, this

Court was concerned with a writ petition filed

under Article 32 of the Constitution wherein the

impartial investigation was sought for the alleged

killing of 299 persons in the police encounters.

7
The Court observed that in the facts and

circumstances presented before it, there was an

imperative need of ensuring that the guardians of

law and order do in fact observe the code of

discipline expected of them and that they function

strictly as the protectors of innocent citizens.”

“In Joginder Kumar vs State of U.P. and others

reported in (1994) 4 SCC 260, It was held by

Hon’ble Supreme Court that exercise of power by

police should not be merely on the suspicion about

the persons complicity in the crime and police

officer must be satisfied about the necessity and

justification of such arrest and reasons for arrest

must be recorded in the case diary and arrest

should normally be avoided except in case of

heinous crime. and failure to this results in

violation of human rights.”

“In People Union for Civil Liberties and Another

versus State of Maharasthra and Ors reported in

8
 (2010) 10 SCC 635 the Hon’ble Supreme Court

held as follows-

Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees

“right to live with human dignity”. Any violation

of human rights is viewed seriously by this Court

as right to life is the most precious right

guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. The

guarantee by Article 21 is available to every

person and even the State has no authority to

violate that right.”

8. That, the Complainant No. 1. is of the opinion that, their (Opponent)

Ex-General Secretary, Mr. Kitti Nawani and the ex-Joint secretary, Mr.

Sarju Prasad is behind the unanimous complaint made by one Reena

Devi for making false, concocted and baseless story against the office

bearer monks of the Society. It is also noted that Mr. Krishna Kumar

Pandey who is the ally of their opponent, was seen with the police

while abducted complainant No.2.

9. That the complainant No. 1. approached the district administration and

several superior police officers, i.e. the District Magistrate, Deputy

Inspector General, Commissioner and the S.S.P. Gaya and submitted

9
 written representation for taking legal action against the accused

persons.

Copy of the said complaint is

annexed herewith as Annexure C.

10. That, the crime which was committed by accused No.1, invites the

contempt of Supreme Court directions which has been reiterated and

reaffirmed in DK Basu v State of West Bengal and so many other

judgments prohibiting such inhumane actions of police.

11.That, the accused No. 1. has exploited the power of police for the sake

of some gain, action must be taken under prevention of corruption act

against all the accused.

12.That, the accused person have committed highly illegal acts, abuses the

power of police and acted like criminals. In the light of

abovementioned facts and circumstances the accused are liable to

prosecute and punished as per law.

13. That, the complainant and witness are ready to prove the case through

cogent evidences against the accused persons, before your hon’ble

Court.

The humble prayer before your hon’ble Court are:

10
1. Your honour may be please to issue suspension order for accused No.1.

and others who were involved in this heinous crime with immediate

effect.

2. Direct the superior officer to investigate why accused No.2, was helping

accused No.1.

3. Direct the concern authority to initiate a departmental enquiry regarding

the said incident by an independent ageny like CID or CBI.

4. Accused No.1. shall be put on trial and action must be taken under

prevention of corruption act.

5. Take any other action as your honour thinks necessary as per relevant law.

It is, therefore, prayed that your

honour may be pleased to take

cognizance of the offence against

accused persons and summon them

and put them on trial and punish

them as per law for the sake of

Justice.

And for this complainants shall ever pray.

11
Gaya, dated, ……/……./2019.

12