PW-20: Beena Ramani

35. The next witness of utmost importance of the case is PW-20, Beena Ramani.She states that she is the owner of a property near Qutub Minar bearing No.H-5/6, Mehrauli Road, New Delhi which was acquired in September, 1995. Theproperty has a shopping arcade in the name of 'Qutub Colonnade', the name of therestaurant was 'Tamarind Court Cafe' which had a proper licence for eatinghouse. The licence of the restaurant was in the name of 'Once Upon a Time' whichstarted business in 1996. She goes on to depose that parties in the restaurantcould be booked on any day as per the desire of the customer, but on Thursdaysthere used to be special private parties where guests could come by invitation.She goes on to say that liquor was served in the courtyard on Thursday parties.PW-6, Malini Ramani, used to manage these Thursday parties.

The witness further states that she knew Jessica Lal and Shyan Munshi andthat there was a proper staff to run the restaurant although friends did help inthe Thursday parties. Jessica Lal and Shyan Munshi were friends of Malini Ramaniand were helping her on that night. The witness goes on to depose that on thenight of 29.4.1999, a Thursday party was organized to bid farewell to herhusband who was leaving for a found-the-world trip. The party was over by 1/1.30a.m. These Thursday parties and special parties were organized generally andwere held in the courtyard and on the roof top.

After the party was over, she was anxious to clean up the place and relievethe waiters so that they were available for proper duties on the followingmorning. At that time, there were some guests left in the courtyard and shespotted some guests in the restaurant where nobody was supposed to be. Shewalked towards the restaurant. While she was moving towards the restaurant, shecrossed Malini Ramani . She moved into the steps of the restaurant and saws afew people standing next to the counter and heard a firing shot. A moment later,she heard another shot. At that time, Jessica Lal, who was standing with somepeople at the far end, was seen by the witness falling down.

There was a door to her right which was swung open with Shyan Munshi comingout with some other person saying that Jessica had been shot. The witness toldShyan Munshi to call Police or doctor or ambulance and was stopping the manaccompanying him. There was commotion. All the people who were with Jessical Lalstarting coming out. The companion of Shyan Munshi was wearing a white T-shirt.He was chubby and fair and this witness asked him as to who he was and why hewas there and also why he had shot Jessica Lal. The witness also asked him togive her his gun, which she thought he was having. The person in the whiteT-shirt denied having shot yet, the witness goes on to say, she asked him againand he kept quiet shaking his head that it was not him. As all others wereleaving, the person in the white T-shirt shoved the witness aside and went out.The witness followed him all the way to the front gate of the main building. Shecould not catch hold of this person.

In the meantime, she was shouting instructions to guests to call hospital orto take Jessica Lal. On reaching the gate, she saw her husband standing thereand told him that this was the man who had shot Jessica Lal and to see in whatcar he was getting into. The witness goes on to say that the person who was toldto be seen by her husband was with some friends at the time of occurrence insidethe cafe. The witness identified Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma by touchinghim and also went on to identify Amardeep Singh Gill, Alok Khanna and VikasYadav as the persons along with Manu Sharma.

Further, the witness goes on to say that from the gate she returned to therestaurant where the waiters had slipped a table cloth under Jessica's body. Thewitness continued to give instructions to get medical help for Jessica andremoved her to Ashlok Hospital. Jessica Lal was still alive and was removed toAshlok Hospital in the car belonging to Sanjay Mehtani. The witness goes on tosay that the report about the incident was lodged in her presence by ShyanMunshi. Jessica Lal was then removed to Apollo Hospital where she was declareddead. A week later, she saw Sidhartha Vashisht at the Police Station

36. This witness was cross-examined by counsel for Sidhartha Vashishta @ ManuSharma, but to no meaningful end. In other words, her testimony remainedunchallenged. The trial court while dealing with this witness has held that thiswitness does not further the case of the Prosecution as the witness was not aneye witness to the occurrence but a witness to the presence of SidharthaVashishta @ Manu Sharma, Amardeep Singh Gill,Alok Khanna and Vikas Yadav at theQutub Colonnade.

The trial court also held that the deposition of this witness was vague sinceshe thought that Manu Sharma was carrying a gun and also felt that he may haveshot Jessica Lal. The Court also held that mere feelings were not enough and didnot mean that Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma had actually fired a shot atJessica Lal. The trial court further went totally wrong in holding that PW-20had admitted not seeing Sidhartha Vashisht firing a shot at Jessica Lal, but itwas only her feeling. With great respect to the learned Judge, we find this is'a complete misreading of evidence'. There is no suggestion let alone anadmission on the part of PW-20, Beena Ramani, that she had not seen the accusedSidhartha Vashisht firing a shot at Jessica Lal. On the contrary, we findpositive assertion by the witness to the following effect :

'I saw a few people standing next to the counter and I heard a shot. A moment later, I heard another shot. Jessica Lal was standing with people at the far end and I saw her falling down. There was a door to my right. It could be swung open and Shyan Munshi came out with another person who was either ahead of him or behind him. Shyan Munshi said that Jessica Lal had been shot. I told Shyan to call the police or doctor or ambulance and I stopped the man accompanying him. There was commotion. All the people who were with Jessica Lal earlier, started coming out. The companion of Shyan was wearing white T- shirt. He was Chabbi and fair and I asked him as to who he was. ?Why are you here and why he shot Jessica Lal. I also asked him to give me his gun. I thought he might be having a gun?. He said that it was not him. I asked him again and he kept quiet and shaking his hand that it was not him. As all others were leaving, therefore, the companion of Shyan also shoved me aside and went out. I ran after him. Again said behind him all the way to the front gate of the main building. He was a few steps ahead of me and I could not catch him. In the meantime, I was shouting instructions to the guests to call hospital or to take Jessica Lal. I reached the gate. My husband was standing there and I told him that this was the man, who had shot Jessica Lal and to see in what car he gets into.'

37. This statement of Bina Ramani clearly shows that she had herself seenSidhartha Vashisht shooting Jessica Lal as otherwise she had no reason to askhim why he had shot Jessical Lal. The aforesaid view taken by the trial Courtappears to have been taken on a concession made by the Special Public Prosecutorhimself who put forth this argument that it was her feeling that Manu Sharmamight have shot at Jessica Lal and also that she had admitted that she was notan eye witness. The trial court, however, instead of itself reading the evidenceof Bina Ramani proceeded to wrongly record acceptance of this submission of theprosecutor. If the evidence of the witness had been read properly, the Courtcould not have held that this witness had admitted that she had not seen ManuSharma firing at Jessica Lal. There is no suggestion, let alone an admission onthe part of PW-20, Bina Ramani, that she had not seen the accused SidharthaVashisht firing a shot at Jessica Lal. This kind of approach of the trial Courthas caused grave miscarriage of justice. There is no doubt that the Court is notsupposed to simply convict someone without any evidence but at the same time theCourt is also to ensure that guilty is not allowed to go scot free simply byaccepting concessions made by the Public Prosecutor.

38. Beena Ramani's presence as an eye witness was sought to be challenged byrecourse to the deposition of PW-46, Madan Kumar, and PW-47, Jatinder Raj, whowere employees at the Qutub Colonnade. It was argued that Madan Kumar rushed tothe spot after hearing 'goli lag gai' and saw Jessica Lal lying on thefloor. Some guests, Beena Ramani and Jatinder Raj were present there. This partof the deposition is sought to mean that Beena Ramani did not confront ManuSharma nor followed him nor asked George Mailhot to keep a watch on Manu Sharma.However, from an analysis of the testimony of PW-46, we find that he came to thespot subsequent to the fire. He did not hear the firing but heard peopleshouting 'goli lag gai'. It is then that he ran down by which time BeenaRamani must have returned to the Cafe after confronting Manu Sharma. Thiswitness certainly deposes to the presence of Beena Ramani at the spot. He alsocorroborates Beena Ramani's actions thereafter. PW-47, Jatinder Raj, has statedthat he was counting cash and was tallying the same when he heard firing of twoshots from the side of the Cafe. He saw from the gate of his office peoplecoming in and going out. At that time he saw Bena Ramani at the stairs of thecafe. He rushed towards her and both went inside the cafe. This, by itself, doesnot show that when the shots were fired, the witness was along with Beena Ramaniin the Cafe. He also came soon after Beena Ramani had come back to the Cafe.Since he was the in-charge of the cash, he would have never left the cashunattended or without securing it before running out. We, therefore, find nosubstance in the criticism that Beena Ramani was not present when the shots werefired.

39. From the above it cannot be said that Beena Ramani had not seen SidharthaVashiushth @ Manu Sharma firing at Jessica Lal. On the contrary, it is apositive statement of the witness that it was Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharmawho fired at Jessica Lal after which Jessica Lal fell down. The witness is awitness of events that took place and is an eye witness to the main occurrence.We have already pointed out that this witness has not been cross- examined atall on this aspect. A general criticism of the Ramani family has been made bylearned counsel for Manu Sharma that they were under constant Police pressureand, therefore, were toeing the Police version.

40. We have given our careful thought to this argument and find no substancein it. The excise case which is being trumpeted as Police pressure, can hardlybe said to be of such a nature as could warrant the entire family supporting afalse or a frivolous case. In any event, in the excise case the accused pleadedguilty and were sentenced with a fine only. The mere fact that Beena Ramani,Malini Ramani and George Mailhot were called to the Police Station on severaloccasions, is no indication of Police pressure to book a false case and theirrepeated interrogation cannot be made a ground to discard this evidence sincethey were accused in an excise case where investigation was going on. Theirsustained interrogation was necessary because they were running illegal pub.There were so many VIPs in that illegal pub on the fateful night.

We were told during the arguments by the learned Standing Counsel for theState that one very senior police officer had also attended that party on 29thApril,1999. So, there was nothing abnormal in the repeated interrogation of theRamani family as the police might be wanting to find out who those persons wereand why they were coming to that illegal pub. The argument that the testimony ofPW-20, PW-6 and PW-24 is hit by Section 163 of the Criminal Procedure Code,though attractive it may sound, is devoid of any merits.

From the analysis of the deposition of PW-20, whom we find a reliable witnessand, in fact, the only brave person present in that party to muster courage toface the shooter while others who claim to be socialites, did not have thecourage to raise a little finger to apprehend the culprit whom this witness waschasing and shouting that he was the person who had shot Jessica Lal, theinvolvement of Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma in the murder of Jessica Lal iswrit large. It was Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma who pulled out his pistol,fired two shots one in the ceiling and the other at Jessica Lal.