As a companysequence she incurred the wrath of police who started filing series of false cases against the appellant Soni Sori.
26/2011 with Police Station Kuakonda district Dantewada, Chhattisgarh is registered against them alongwith certain other persons.
15 lakhs from B.K. Lala at village Palnar weekly market at 1.00 p.m. on 9.9.2011.
From the companyrt she was taken to Jagdalpur Jail from where she was taken to Maharani hospital from Jagdalpur and admitted there at 8.00 p.m. On 12.10.2011 she was referred to Bhim Rao Ambedkar Medical College, Raipur.
To buttress this submission of false implication, Mr. Gonsalves also pointed out that the appellant Soni Sori who was a teacher in a Government School had in fact been attending the school which was clear from the attendance register filed as Annexure P 1 to the SLP.
Mr. Gonsalves further submitted that in September, 2011, Tehelka Magazine did a sting operation of the companyversation which took place between the appellant and companystable Mankar of the Kirandul police station, in which companystable Mankar admitted in a phone companyversation that the appellant, Soni Sori and her nephew Lingaram Kodopi were being framed in the Essar case, and that Lingaram Kodopi was picked up from the house and number from the bazaar.
The police informed the Magistrate by falsely stating that she had suffered a fall in the bathroom.
Details of these cases are given in Para 8 of the Synopsis to the Special Leave Petition.
The appellant Lingaram Kodopi is the nephew of the appellant Soni Sori Lingarams father and Soni Soris husband were the real brothers .
The Court also observed, while giving this direction, that the injuries sustained by her do number prima facie appear to be simple as had been projected by the Chhattisgarh Police.
Shri B.K. Lala as well as Shri DVCS Verma were also arrested.
The appellants have filed the companyy of the CD with transcription and excerpts of the companyversation are reproduced in the SLP paper book as well.
He also submitted that because of the torture she suffered at the hands of police during interrogation on that day, her health deteriorated and she had to be admitted into the Dantewada district hospital at 9.30 a.m. on 10.10.2011.
These two appellants however were denied bail by the Trial Court and, as mentioned above, even the High Court has rejected their bail applications.
After the examination of Soni Sori by the aforesaid hospital in Kolkata and receiving the report from the said hospital, on 2.5.2012 this Court directed the Director of All India Institute of Medical Sciences AIIMS to companystitute a Board of Directors, which would include the Head of the Department of Gynaecology, Endocrinology and the Cardiac Department, to examine Ms. Soni Sori, as to her physical companydition and, thereafter, to recommend the treatment to be undergone in AIIMS itself.
In that Writ Petition she stated that she was tribal woman from Village Sameli in Dantewada district of Chhattisgarh.
Both have been arrested in companynection with the aforesaid case.
On that basis his submission was that this sting operation was enough to show that the appellants were framed falsely in the entire case.
The companycerned police companyducted a raid when these two appellants were in the process of receiving the amount of Rs.
These two other accused persons, viz.
1 in this case is a companytractor of Essar Company who was supposed to pay money to these naxalites.
Apart from B.K. Lala and the two appellants, one DVCS Verma who is the General Manager of Essar Company has also been implicated in the said case.
Her nephew Mr. Lingaram Kodopi on 31.8.2009 was kidnapped by the Chhattisgarh police and forced to become a Special Police Officer SPO .
From the perusal of the order of the High Court it becomes clear that the High Court has mainly been influenced by the serious nature of crime allegedly companymitted by these appellants.
In nut shell the prosecution case is that on 8.9.2011, the companycerned police received secret information that these appellants are likely to work as companyduit for paying huge amount to the Naxalties, which was to be paid by Essar Company through companyaccused B.K. Lala, a companytractor of the said companypany, whose plant was operating in the naxal affected areas.
206 of 2011 pending in this Court wherein the aforesaid worsening health companydition of Soni Sori was explained and on 20.10.2011 this Court directed that she be taken to Kolkata and admitted in Nil Ratan Sarkar Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata.
For the alleged offence under the aforesaid provisions crime No.
As per the prosecution, in the present case different aspects of naxal movements had appeared wherein these naxalites receiving huge amount of money from Corporate groups to further their activities of waging war against the companyntry.
When the police party reached, a pandemonium took place and taking advantage thereof Soni Sori successfully escaped.
However, Lingaram Kodopi and companyaccused B.K. Lala were arrested from the spot.
Mr. Gonsalves also referred to the proceedings in Writ Petition Crl.
5469 of 2009 before the Chhattisgarh High Court as a result of which Mr. Lingaram was released from custody.
The appellant Soni Sori was also arrested afterwards on 12.10.2011 in Delhi.
The High Court also took numbere of the statements of certain witnesses which were recorded during investigation and went through the case diary.
At AIIMS she was treated for vulval excoriations and scabies and thereafter transferred to Raipur Central Prison and then to Jagdalpur Central Prison.
Shri DVCS Verma was granted bail on 3.1.2012.
However, both have since been enlarged on bail, Shri B.K. Lala who was arrested on 9.9.2011 was granted statutory bail on 4.2.2012, on the ground that charge sheet was number filed until after 90 days from the date of registration of FIR.
Both these appellants have been implicated under Sections 121, 124 1 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 8 1 2 3 of the Chhattisgarh Jansuraksha Adhiniyam and Sections 10 13 of the Unlawful Activities of the Act.
K. SIKRI, J. Leave granted.
Both these appeals arise out of companymon order dated 8.7.2013 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh, whereby applications for bail preferred by these two appellants were rejected.
Both the appellants were made companyduits to receive money from B.K. Lala so that they companyld hand it over to the companycerned naxalite persons.
He thereafter became a journalist and participated in several TV programmes on the massacres and killings taking place in Chhattisgarh and he also took photographs of the houses of the tribals that were burnt by the Chhattisgarh police and these photographs were printed in magazines.
She, therefore, through the brother of Lingaram, organized and filed a Writ Petition habeas companypus No.
When she was taken to the Court on that day at 1.45 p.m. she was number even in a position to stand and walk.
Appellants are related to each other.
Mr. Gonsalves also highlighted the atrocity companymitted on her by the police during her custody, particularly on 8.10.2011.
As per the High Court since direct evidence was available against these accused persons showing their companyplicity, there was a prima facie evidence against the appellants to the effect that they were found to be working as companyduit between Essar Company through B.K. Lala and the naxalites.
Mr. Gonsalves also argued that even other family members of Soni Sori have been tortured by the police.
Shri B.K. Lala, Accused No.
