Delhi high court upset with govt stand on Massey incident

The Delhi high court on Tuesday expressed dissatisfaction with the government affidavit filed on the Martin Massey incident, in which a commuter was thrashed for straying on to the prime minister's route, and directed that additional material be placed on record.

Posting further hearing of the matter for Wednesday, a division bench consisting of Acting Chief Justice Mahinder Narain and Justice S K Mahajan called for typed copies of the two medical reports on Massey dated May 9 and 13,1997.

The judges also asked for the names and designation of the policemen riding the Gypsy which chased Massey on the night of May 9 and the names and designation of the policemen who stopped him near the 'Gol Gumbud roundabout.

The judges directed that the witnesses's statements recorded under section 164 Criminal Procedure Code be placed on record as also the vehicle inspection report of Massey's scooter. The judges also directed that the helmet worn by Massey be produced in court.

When the judges were informed by amicus curiae Pran Nath Lekhi that Massey had not received the Rs 10,000 sanctioned for him by the lieutenant governor, the judges ordered that the money should be given to him immediately.

The judges found the affidavit filed by Deputy Commissioner of Police Balaji Srivastava on behalf of the Delhi police objectionable on many counts. For one, they observed that the affidavit should have been signed by the additional commissioner of police who was conducting the inquiry into the Massey incident.

Also, the judges expressed scepticism about the stand that Massey suffered injuries while falling down from his scooter and that there were eyewitness accounts to substantiate this.

Detailing the May 9 incident, the police affidavit claimed that Massey was chased by the police Gypsy down Mathura road on the night of May 9 as he immediately followed the prime minister's convoy without waiting for the mandatory three minutes to be over. Massey was repeatedly asked on the public address system fitted on the vehicle to stop. Instead, he panicked and accelerated. He was finally intercepted by ''lathi-wielding'' policemen stationed further down the road near the Nizamuddin police station, the report said.

The police denied Massey's claim that his scooter was bumped from the back by the police Gypsy or that he was ''mercilessly beaten up'' by about ten to 12 policemen who stopped him.

The police version was supported by two tea shop owners on Mathura road, who said Massey fell on his own in ''nervousness and panic'' and was not hit from the back. The vehicle inspection report also showed that there were no bumps on the rear side of the scooter, the affidavit said.

The judges, however, agreed with Lekhi that the two tea stall owners, who were situated at a distance of 80 feet from the road, would have found it difficult to make out anything at night. The judges also observed that if the scooter was fitted with a steppney at the back, collision with a bumper may not leave any dents.

While describing as ''obviously fudged'' the first medical report made out by Dr Bulia of the All India Medical Institute of Sciences immediately after the incident, the judges noted that the second report by a four-member board of AIIMS doctors made a distinction between injuries caused by fist blows, lathis and those by ''hard blunt objects''.

The judges observed that it was unlikely that Massey, who was wearing a helmet, received 25 injuries on his knees, thighs, shoulders, face and arms and had his four teeth broken and lips contused by a ''couple of lathi blows'' administered to stop him.

While the second medical report mentioned injuries by ''a hard blunt object'', the judges noted that the affidavit did not mention it. The affidavit was also silent about the actual time of the incident, the judges observed.

The judges had taken suo motu notice of the incident in a national daily on May 13 and issued notices to the central and Delhi governments, the prime minister's secretariat and the National Security Guard to show what action should be taken in the matter.

At the last hearing, the judges had expressed concern about police high-handedness and the security drill during the prime minister's movements.