Punjab-Haryana High Court
Paramjit Singh Alias Pamma vs State Of Punjab And Another on 29 July, 2024
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770
1
CRM-M-46915-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-46915-2022
Reserved on: 19.07.2024
Pronounced on: 29.07.2024
Paramjit Singh alias Pamma ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. A.P.S. Deol, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. H.S. Deol, Advocate and
Mr. Anmol Grewal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Gurpartap S. Bhullar, Asst. AG, Punjab.
Mr. Deepak Sabharwal, Advocate
for CBI.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 31 21.05.1991 Nurpur Bedi, Distt. 302, 307, 34 IPC; 25 of Arms Act and Roopnagar Section 5 TDA(P) Act
1. The petitioner, who was arraigned as an accused, could not be arrested, declared proclaimed offender on 17.08.1992 passed by SDJM, Anandpur Sahib and as such final report under Section 173 CrPC filed and evidence was recorded under Section 299 CrPC in absentia was filed on 30.09.1992, in the FIR captioned above, had voluntarily come up before this Court under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking bail, with prayers to surrender before the trial Court and further relief for interim bail till the decision of the present petition.
2. In Note 3 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.
3. On 12.10.2022, this Court had passed the following order:-
"Notices served upon the official respondent No.1 through the State's counsel.1
1 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:06 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 2 CRM-M-46915-2022 Notices served upon the official respondent No.2 through the counsel. Petitioner is present in the Cout and is identified by his counsel. He is directed to join proceeding on 20.10.2022 at 10am before the concerned trial Court and remain there upto 5PM or earlier with permission. Till then, the arrest of the petitioner is stayed failure to do so shall ipso facto result in the automatically recalling of this order without any further reference to this Court.
List on 20.10.2022.
State to file reply in the meantime."
4. On 20.10.2022, this Court had passed the following order:-
"Bar is abstaining from work.
Brother-in-law of the petitioner is present in the Court today and he submits that in compliance of the directions of this Court vide order dated 12.10.2022, the petitioner is present today before the concerned trial Court.
Given above, the petitioner is permitted to leave the trial Court and he is directed to again appear on 28.10.2022.
List on 28.10.2022."
5. After that on 28.10.2022, when the matter was taken up, Mr. H.S. Deol, Advocate appearing for the petitioner, submitted that in compliance with the previous orders, the petitioner was present before the concerned Court at Sri Anandpur Sahib and surrendered that day itself. Given such a statement, the trial Court was asked to release the petitioner on interim bail on that day itself, subject to compliance with the conditions. The said interim order is continuing till date.
6. A copy of the FIR is annexed herewith the petition as Annexure P-1, the relevant portion of the same reads as under: -
"At this time, information from Inspector Sardar Jaspal Singh CỦA Staff through Const. Gamroop-750 has been sent to SHO Incharge P.S. Nurpur Bedi. That today I Inspector Jaspal Singh received information from informer that at the Dera of Jagdish Singh, terrorist Sohan Singh @Fauji r/o Masirowal and younger brother of Jagjeet Singh namely Bhai Pamma and three other companions who have weapons and ammunition and staying. On the basis of this information I, Inspector along with ASI Balwant Singh, HC Balkar Sisngh-817, Nirmal Singh-939, Const. Manjeet Singh-408, Prithipal Singh-631, Gyan Chand-483, Jagir Singh-446, Hans Raj on official Gypsy no. PB-11-1102 along with jeep No. PB-R-5281 driver Bhagwan. Dass and Bhupinder Singh reached at P.S. Noorpur Bedi where Pritam Singh ASI, SHO along with Sohan Lal, ASI, Harnek Singh HC, Satnam Singh-341, HC Yashpal-1065 Const. Bhupinder- 389, Swarup Lal- 293, Ram Swarup-758, Amarnath-588 driver Tilak Raj-762 on official Gypsy bearing no. PB-12-580 whose driver is Const. Pawan Kumar-120 were going to the dera of Jagdish Singh on the way met patrolling party of BSF whose Incharge is DSP Sanjay Panta 714 Btln, took it along and reached at dera of Jagdish Singh and took position by erecting separate 2 2 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 3 CRM-M-46915-2022 parties and HC Yashpal Singh who was with the party of ASI/SHO Sh. Pritam Singh, illuminated the torch towards the dera situated in the bunch of Safeda trees. Then on llumination of light immediately at 8.30 p.m. firing from automatic weapons started from inside. I, Inspector gave orders to different parties too fire for defence. Counter firing continued for quite some time from front. During firing, officers were informed through wire set. During firing the huts of dera got ignited and were burnt. When dera was searched it was found that HC Yashpal Singh has died at the spot due to bullet injury and ASI/SHO got injured due to bullet injury who was taken to hospital for treatment and near the Chhan of the dera one body of unidentified person was found. Near the right hand of this dead body one revolver 32 bore whose 6 cartridges were fired and in the pocket of whose shirt 5 live 32 bore cartridges and from nearby 24 empty cartridges of AK 47 were found out of which 5 cartridges were live and from nearby 1 magazine of AK-47 and 24 empty cartridges of AK-47 were found. Recovery memo of revolver was prepared separately. Revolver and empty cartridges were taken into police custody vide different memos. The companions of deceased succeeded in running away taking the benefit of darkness.
Due to absconding terrorist Sohan Singh Fauji, resident of Masirowal and Pamma resident of Bhaini along with companions fired upon the police party with the intention to kill, HC Yashpal was killed at the spot and SHO/ASI Pritam Singh was injured. The aforesaid by attacking the police party have committed the offence u/s 302/307/34 IPC. Ruka is sent through Const. Ram Sarup to the police Station for registration of case. FIR no. be intimated. Myself Inspector along with police officials are busy in investigation at the spot."
7. After registration of FIR, the petitioner could not be nabbed and a report under Section 173 CrPC was filed, which is annexed as Annexure P-8, which reads as follows:-
"Brief facts of the case are as follows that on 21.05.1991. Inspector Jaspal Singh, CIA, Ropar alongwith ASI Balwant Singh. HC Balkar Sisngh-817, Nirmal Singh-939, Const. Manjeet Singh-408. Prithipal Singh-631, Gyan Chand-483, Jagir Singh-446, Hans Raj on official Gypsy no. PB-11-1102 along with jeep No. PB-R-5281 driver Bhagwan Dass and Bhupinder Singh reached at P.S. Noorpur Bedi where Pritam Singh ASI, SHO along with Sohan Lal, ASI, Harnek Singh HC, Satnam Singh-341, HC Yashpal-1065 Const. Bhupinder- 389, Swarup Lal-293, Ram Swarup-758. Amarnath-588 driver Tilak Raj-762 on official Gypsy bearing no. PB-12-580 whose driver is Const. Pawan Kumar-120 were going to the dera of Jagdish Singh regarding which Inspector Sir had got secret information that at the Dera of Jagdish Singh, terrorist Sohan Singh (@Fauji ro Masirowal and younger brother of Jagdish Singh namely Bhai Pamma and other companions who have weapons and ammunition are staying. On the basis of this information when, Inspector along with others was going there, on the way, they met patrolling party of BSF whose Incharge is DSP Sanjay Panta 44 Btin, took it along and reached at dera of Jagdish Singh and took position by erecting separate parties and HC Yashpal Singh 1063 who was 3 3 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 4 CRM-M-46915-2022 with the party of ASI/SHO Sh. Pritam Singh, illuminated the torch towards the dera situated in the bunch of Safeda trees. Then on illumination of light immediately at 8.30 p.m. firing from automatic weapons started from inside. Inspector gave orders to different parties to fire for defence. Counter firing continued for quite some time from front. During firing, officers were informed through wire set. During firing the huts of dera got ignited and were burnt. When dera was searched it was found that HC Yashpal Singh 1063 has died at the spot due to bullet injury and ASI/SHO Pritam Singh got injured due to bullet injury who was taken to hospital for treatment and near the Chhan of the dera one body of unidentified person was found. Near the right hand of this dead body one revolver 32 bore whose 6 cartridges were found and in the pocket of whose shirt 5 live 32 bore cartridges and from nearby 24 empty cartridges of AK 47 were found out of which 5 cartridges were live and from nearby I magazine of AK-47 and 24 empty cartridges of AK-47 were found. Recovery memo of revolver was prepared separately. Revolver and empty cartridges were taken into police custody vide different memos. The companions of deceased succeeded in running away taking the benefit of darkness.
Due to absconding terrorist Sohan Singh Fauji, resident of Masirowal and Pamma resident of Bhaini along with companions fired upon the police party with the intention to kill, HC Yashpal 1063 was killed at the spot and SHO/AS! Pritam Singh was injured. The aforesaid by attacking the police party have committed the offence u/s 302/307:34 IPC. Inspector hasdent the ruqa through Const. Ram Sarup 750 to the police Station for registration of case and got the present case registered. Further investifation was conducted. During investigation. on 1.06.91,it is found that this incident had been carried out by Sohan Singh @Fauji s/o Jitram r/o Masirowal, Amir Singh @ Sira s/o Gurdial Singh caste Jatt r/o Dachar..., Rattan Singh@DC s/o Balraj Singh r/o Gonder, Paramjit Singh @ Pamma and Jagdish Singh@Disa sons Nacchhattar Singh r/o Bhaini. During investigation, efforts were made to arrest these accused but they could not be arrested. Thereafter investigation was conducted by ....Singh SHo and then by myself SI. During investigation, it is found that accused Sohan Singh Fauji. Amir Singh@ Sira and Jagdish Singh were killed in separate police encounter. All possible efforts were made to arrest Paramjit Singh@Pamma and Rattan Singh@ DC, but when they were not found, proceeding under section 82,83 were carried out against these accused. Therefore, Challan against these accused has been prepared u/s 299 CrPC. Witnesses mentioned in col. no. 6 be summoned and examined. Cognizance of case be taken and accused be punished."
8. After that petitioner did not appear before this Court and filed a petition (CRM-M- 30920-2021) seeking quashing of proclamation order. Vide order dated 13.09.2022, this Court observed that despite passing of 30 years, police failed to catch the petitioner and it is the accused who has voluntarily come to this Court offering to join investigation and surrender before the Majesty of this Court. It also transpired that proclamation was 4 4 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 5 CRM-M-46915-2022 never served upon the petitioner. Consequently, this Court quashed the proclamation order dated 17.08.1992. The petitioner was directed to approach the concerned Court by filing bail application on or before 30.09.2022 and he was protected till that date.
9. Counsel for the petitioner submits that this order was never challenged by the opposite parties and has attained finality. After that, the petitioner approached the Sessions Judge, Rupnagar, who, vide order dated 27.09.2022, dismissed the petitioner's anticipatory bail. Aggrieved by that, the petitioner came up before this Court by filing the petition under Section 439 CrPC for interim bail and further seeking permission to surrender.
10. I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the record, and its analysis would lead to the following outcome.
11. Mr. APS Deol, Sr. Advocate, the Counsel for the petitioner, made the following submissions: -
(a) on the night at 8.30 pm, after the police encounter with terrorists, the petitioner's brother Jagdish Singh(30/32 yrs.), a Boatman in the PWD Department, was killed by the police party led by Inspector Jaspal Singh (Complainant), after severe torture at his Dera(Farmhouse) in the area of Village Agampur PS Nurpur Bedi. Four other family members, namely Surjit Kaur Mother (65 years old): ii. Balwinder Kaur, Bhabhi (30 yrs.) iii.
Niece (3 yrs.) iv. Infant nephews (3 months), as per the petitioner, are believed to have been killed by the Police, who were eyewitnesses of the murder of Jagdish Singh and were eliminated by the police in extra- judicial killing, and their dead bodies were not even found till today. As the petitioner (eyewitness) succeeded in escaping, the police officers nominated the petitioner as terrorist/accused in the present FIR No. 31 dated 21-05-1991, along with others regarding the death of police personnel during the cross-firing of police with terrorists.
(b) The Police hurriedly conducted a post-mortem examination on the dead body of Jagdish Singh, which projected him to be the dead body of an 'Unknown person' killed in a police encounter at C.H. Anandpur Sahib. Post-mortem described 10 injuries on the dead body. Injury no. 8 and 9 were opined to be the result of a firearm and were the cause of death. Injury nos. 1 to 7 and 10 were ante mortem injuries that were caused before Injury nos. 8 and 9 and were opined to be the result of blunt 5 5 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 6 CRM-M-46915-2022 object/blunt force.
(c) In the morning, the petitioner informed his uncle, Sh. K.S. Kauladhar, who was posted as Addl. Distt. & Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, about the incident.
(d) Running from pillar to post, the petitioner approached Deputy Commissioner Ropar by filing an application narrating the sequence of this incident in which his brother Jagdish Singh was brutally murdered and his family members eliminated by the police party to cover up for the murder of Jagdish Singh in police torture showing as killed in the encounter.
(e) The Deputy Commissioner, Ropar, on receipt of this complaint vide application no. 1155/Peshi dated 12-12-1991 marked the same to SDM Anandpur Sahib for conducting a magisterial inquiry into the incident.
(f) Ld. SDM concluded that Jagdish Singh (aged 32 years since deceased) (brother of petitioner) was employed in the PWD Department as a Boatman and was residing in his Dera in the revenue limits of village Agampur along with his mother, wife, and daughter, aged 3 years and son, aged 3 months. It was a case of torture and subsequent killing. Even bullet injury shows the bullet entered from the right side of the skull and came out from the left side, piercing the skull. If Jagdish Singh had been killed in the encounter, the chances of a bullet hitting the front portion of the body, or the back would have been greater. The presence of multiple injuries on the body proves beyond doubt that Jagdish Singh was captured, brutally tortured, and killed by the police. Furthermore, the police version that militants were hiding in the Dera of Jagdish Singh is debatable, but it remains to be seen whether Jagdish Singh was harboring the terrorists or they had taken shelter at the Dera forcibly. The family of Jagdish Singh has no link with militants, as certified by independent witnesses in the area. Even the antecedents of both Jagdish Singh and Paramjit Singh @ Pamma have been verified, but no link has been established with the militants. Jagdish Singh, who was not a militant, was tortured and later murdered by the police to cover up his death and to hide the identity of the dead body; an autopsy was performed as that 'unknown person' knowing fully well that it was the dead body of Jagdish Singh (Boatman). All this was done by the police by 6 6 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 7 CRM-M-46915-2022 hurriedly disposing of the same, knowing fully well that handing over his body to relatives or respectable would lead to agitation. Thus, in all probability, the family members of Jagdish Singh, being eyewitnesses, were also eliminated by the police, and both Jagdish Singh and Paramjit Singh @ Pamma have no connection with the militants. Hence, the FIR naming Paramjit Singh @ Pamma as the accused is false.
(g) To pressure the petitioner regarding his complaint to DC, the accused Police Officers got the petitioner declared PO from the court of SDJM Anandpur Sahib by showing his earlier address where the encounter took place, even after the villagers reported that after the encounter, nobody resides at that house anymore. They filed a challan (in absentia) and proceedings u/s 229 CrPC was followed as the petitioner was PO.
(h) The enquiry report submitted by SDM Anandpur Sahib was considered by Deputy Commissioner Ropar, who endorsed the same and forwarded it to SSP, Ropar and after legal opinion from DDA(L), FIR No. 29 dated 19- 12-1992 u/s 304 IPC P.S. Nurpur Bedi on the complaint of Paramjit Singh @ Pamma (Petitioner) was registered against police officials namely Insp. Jaspal Singh, etc., for torturing and murdering Jagdish Singh and his 4 other family members.
(i) Since the police, to help their own police officials, did not conduct any fair investigation to arrest the real culprits, namely Insp. Jaspal Singh, etc., is a known encounter specialist. Swaran Singh, brother of the petitioner, filed CWP No. 12330/95 under Art.226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ or any direction to order CBI to investigate the murder of his brother Jagdish Singh (aged 32 years), his mother, wife of Jagdish Singh and daughter aged 3 years and son aged 3 months at the hands of police.
(j) This High Court, after considering the reply by the State and in view of peculiar facts and circumstances observed, FIR was registered way back on 19-12-1992 based on the enquiry report submitted by SDM with regard to the incident dated 21-5- 1991 alleging killing 5 members of the family including a lady and minor children in a false encounter. It is pathetic to see a cold attitude on the part of the State Police in dealing with cases where police officials are involved, and the State has not taken appropriate steps to investigate the matter. The division bench of this 7 7 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 8 CRM-M-46915-2022 Hon'ble Court vide order dated 26-4-1996 directed the transfer of the matter to CBI for expeditious investigation.
(k) A new CBI case No. RC-0007(S)/96 was registered against Insp. Jaspal Singh & others with regard to the extrajudicial killing of petitioner's brother & other family members.
(l) CBI, after investigation, submitted closure report u/s 173 Cr.P.C. in the Court of Id. Special Magistrate, CBI. However, the Id. Special Magistrate CBI disagreed with the same and ordered further investigation.
(m) Again, the CBI filed a closure report in 2005, and on the protest petition filed by the petitioner, Paramjit Singh @ Pamma, the case was sent for further investigation.
(n) During further investigation, the CBI examined the petitioner, Paramjit Singh @ Pamma, and recorded his statement u/s 161 Cr. P.C. as an eyewitness. The CBI then filed a closure report again.
(o) The final closure report was again filed in the court of Special Court CBI, Mohali.
(p) That in pursuance to the closure report, notice was issued to the complainant Paramjit Singh (petitioner). However, it was brought to the notice of the Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, that Paramjit Singh, complainant, had already been declared a Proclaimed offender by the court of SDJM Anandpur Sahib vide order dated 16-12-1992 in the present FIR. The case was adjourned by the Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, for the appearance of the complainant and consideration of the closure report. The petitioner was totally unaware of the order declaring him PO as he was residing at Jagraon. Even his passport was renewed after police verification at Jagraon in the year 2005.
(q) Petitioner filed CRM-M-30920-2021 challenging order dated 17-08- 1992 declaring him this Hon'ble Court was pleased to grant interim relief to the petitioner and quashed the said order.
(r) Petitioner filed CRM-M-46139-2022 to grant anticipatory bail; this Hon'ble Court was pleased to grant interim relief to the petitioner and granted him liberty to apply for regular bail while disposing of the said petition.
88 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 9 CRM-M-46915-2022
(s) Petitioner filed the present petition u/s 439 CrPC for regular grant, and this Hon'ble Court was pleased to grant interim bail to the petitioner. Petitioner regularly appears before the trial Court on every date and has not misused the interim bail."
12. Counsel for the Respondents vehemently opposed the bail and referred to the reply filed by the concerned DySP, which reads as follows: -
"3. That the present petition is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR no. 31 dated 21.05.1991 under Section 302, 307, 34 IPC, Section 25 Arms Act and Section 5 TDA (P) Act registered at P.S. Nurpur Bedi, is liable to be dismissed being devoid of any substance and merits and the facts as stated herein below.
4. That it is pertinent to mention here that no family member of the petitioner had died on the day of occurrence of incident. The petitioner has concocted this false story about elimination of his family members as no dead body of any of the allegedly deceased family members was recovered from there except Jagdish Singh (brother of the petitioner) who was aiding and abetting the terrorists was found. Hence, the story about eliminating other family members and disappearing their bodies is a very far-fetched and ill- conceived story that too at a later stage (after thought) to save the skin of the petitioner. Had it been a case of elimination than the body of Jagdish Singh would also not have been found from the spot. It is pertinent to mention here that in the said incident, petitioner along with the deceased brother and other co- accused/terrorists have killed one police officer namely Yashpal Singh and injured another police officer namely Pritam Singh.
5. That further it is submitted that the petitioner has not appeared in person before the Learned Additional Session Judge during the bail application. Further it is pertinent to mention here that after the transfer of the case, pertaining to the complaint moved by the Petitioner regarding the alleged killing of his family members, to the CBI on the directions of this Hon'ble Court in CWP No. 12330 of 1995, the CBI finding no merit in the same had filed first closure report on 29.04.1999, followed by Closure Reports on 15.09.2003, 23.08.2011 and 03.09.2020, but the petitioner intentionally did not appearing there also. Now he came to this Hon'ble Court seeking bail so as to appear before CBI Court and keep pressurizing the police officials so as to delay the proceedings against him by lingering the case pending before CBI Court.
6. That it is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner is the main accused in the present case, so the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required at this stage in view of the allegations and gravity of the substance against him to know the modus operandi as the petitioner along with the deceased brother and other co- accused/terrorists have killed one police officer namely Yashpal Singh and injured another police officer namely Pritam Singh and he was among the 9 9 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 10 CRM-M-46915-2022 aggressive party and the FIR is qua him and it was his family property where the Incident occurred.
6(a) to (r) That it is vehemently denied that any of the family members were eliminated by the police in extra judicial killing. The petitioner has concocted the false story as no dead body of any member had been recovered from there except that of Jagdish Singh. Further with regard to the subject matter of the present petition, it is respectfully submitted that case/FIR No. 31 on dated 21.05.1991 under Section 302/507/34 IPC, 25/54/59 Arms Act, 5 TDA (P) Act was registered at PS Nurpur Bedi District Nurpur Bedi, District Rupnagar against Sohan Singh @ Fauji and the petitioner Paramjit Singh alias Pamma on the ruqa of Inspector Jaspal Singh, CIA Staff, Roopnagar that a secret information was received with him that the terrorists Sohan Singh alias Fauji and the petitioner along with their 2 companions and heavy quantity ammunition were staying at the Dera of Jagdish Singh (brother of petitioner), upon which, he along with the police party comprising of SI Balwant Singh, HC Balkar Singh, Nirmal Singh, constable Manjit Singh, Prithi Pal Singh, Gyan Chand, Jagir Singh, Hans Raj, driver Bhagwan Dass and Bhupinder Singh reached PS Nurpur Bedi where SHO/ASI Pritam Singh along with ASI Sohan Lal, ASI Harnek Singh, HC Satnam Singh; HC Yashpal, constable Bhupinder Singh, Swaroop Lal, Ram Swaroop, Amar Nath, driver Tilak Raj and Constable Pawan Kumar were going to the Dera of Jagdish Singh. On the way, the patrolling party of BSF headed by Sanjay Ponta, DSP met them, which was taken along at the dera of Jagdish Singh and after making different- different parties, 2 positions. HC Yaslipal in the police party of SHO Pritam Singh illuminated the light of the torch on the Dera then immediately, at around 8:30 PM, the firing with automatic weapons started from inside the Dera. He also directed the different- different parties to start firing in defense. The firing continued for a long time. During firing, the huts inside the Dera were burnt to ashes. After that firing stopped, then the nearby areas of the Dera were searched wherein it transpired that a HC Yashpal had died at the spot due to the bullet hitting his chest during firing and SHO Pritam Singh got injured due to bullet hitting him, was taken to hospital for treatment and one dead body of 1 unknown person with bullet injuries was recovered near the terrace of the Dera and one revolver 32 bore was recovered near his right hand wherein 6 bullets were found to be filed from the said revolver and 5 live cartridges 32 bore were present in the pocket of his Shirt and one magazine of AK-47 with 5 live cartridges was found nearby and 24 empty shells of AK-47 were recovered. The separate memo was prepared regarding the recovered revolver. The revolver and empty shells were taken into police possession vide Separate recovery memos. The accomplices of the deceased were successful in running away taking the advantage of the dark. The absconding terrorists Sohan Singh and the petitioner along with their accomplices committed the offences under Sections 302/307/34 IPC, 25/54/59 Arms Act and 5 TDA (P) Act by firing bullets at the police party with the intention to kill them and caused the death of Yashpal Singh and injures SHO Pritam Singh.10
10 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 11 CRM-M-46915-2022 It is further submitted that during investigation, the spot was inspected, site plan was prepared and the statement of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the recoveries effected from the spot were taken into police possession, in accordance with the law. The soil blood of Yashpal Singh and the unidentified dead body were collected from the spot. The statement of the witnesses under Section 175 Cr.P.C. were recorded. The forms 25-35(A) were filed. The post-mortem of the dead bodies was got conducted from Civil Hospital, Anandpur Sahib. The recovered weapons, bullets, live cartridges, empty shells etc. were sent for examination to the office of Chemical Examiner, Patiala. The fingerprints of the unidentified dead bodies were obtained and sent for examination to Director, Fingerprint, Phillaur.
Further it is respectfully submitted that during the course of investigation, the statement of Darshan Singh resident of Village Bhaini was recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C, on 01.06.1991, who stated that the terrorists involved in the occurrence/police encounter dated 21.05.1991 were Sohan Singh alias Fauji, petitioner, Jagdish Singh, Rattan Singh and Amir Singh and the said persons has started firing at the police party. He further identified the unknown/unidentified dead body recovered from the spot and stated the same to be of Jagdish Singh. He further stated that the accused Sohan Singh and Amir Singh have also died in different- different police encounters. Accordingly, on the statement of Darshan Singh, Rattan Singh was nominated as an accused in the present FIR on 01.06.1991 and the special reports in this regard was prepared and sent to Learned Magistrate and senior police officials.
Further it is submitted that during the investigation, strenuous efforts were made to arrest the petitioner and the accused Rattan Singh, however, they could not be arrested as they had been evading. their arrest and have been on run. Accordingly, the proceedings under section 82 Cr.P.C. were initiated against the petitioner and the accused Rattan Singh and consequently, they were declared as proclaimed offenders on 17.08.1992. Thereafter the said order was quashed by this Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 13.09.2022.
It is further submitted that from the investigation conducted, the offences against the petitioner and the accused Rattan Singh stood duly proved and accordingly, the report under section 173 Cr.P.C. was prepared on 30.09.1992 and presented before the Learned Court on 16.12.1992.
It is vehemently denied that the family members of the petitioner were eliminated by the police in extra judicial killing. Detailed reply as given in the preliminary objections may also be read here. It is further relevant to mention here that false FIR no. 29 dated 19.12.1992 under Section 304 of IPC P.S. Nurpur Bedi has been registered against the police officials. It is pertinent to mention here that after the transfer of the case to the CBI on the directions of this Hon'ble Court in CWP No. 12330 of 1995, the CBI had filed first closure report on 29.04.1999, followed by Closure Reports on 15.09.2003, 23.08.2011 and 03.09.2020. It is further submitted that the 11 11 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 12 CRM-M-46915-2022 petitioner has alleged that the proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. were initiated against him by giving his old address of Village Bhaini, where the incident has taken place and the petitioner, much before that had shifted to Jagraon and started living with his brother. It is relevant to mention here that even as per the FIR No. 29 dated 19.12.1992 under Section 304 IPC registered at P.S. Nurpur Bedi, which was lodged at the instance of the petitioner, he himself has given the address of Village Agampur Bela, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib, District Ropar. It is pertinent to mention here that in the above stated FIR the petitioner was shown as the complainant with the same address and when the summons were sent on that address then the plea of the petitioner is that he is not the resident of the same. Here it is proved that he is not coming with clean hands before this Hon'ble Court. The petitioner was declared as proclaimed offender on 17.08.1992 whereas the above said FIR was registered on 19.12.1992. Thus, the above stated facts would clearly prove that the petitioner was evading the warrants of arrest intentionally and was having full knowledge of the proceedings of the present FIR in question. Further petitioner even after having notice and knowledge of the above mentioned FIR as well as the order dated 17.08.1992 has managed to escape from the proceedings for more than 30 years. Further the petitioner has not appeared in person in all the successive proceedings initiated by him just to keep delaying the matter by keeping it alive as a pressure tactics inspite of repeated closure reports by CBI. It is pertinent to mention here that Respondent No.2, as per directions of this Hon'ble Court, have filed an affidavit dated 11.07.2022 before this Hon'ble Court in the another petition and it has been stated that the petitioner has appeared only twice before the CBI and his statement was recorded on 01.03.2016, which clearly proves the fact that the petitioner had knowledge of the present FIR in question."
13. A careful analysis of the arguments and counter-arguments primafacie points towards sufficient evidence connecting the petitioner with the incident in question, who was one of the main accused. A thorough investigation has been conducted, pointing towards the petitioner's role in firing at the police party. Any further discussions would certainly prejudice the petitioner's case. The evidence mentioned in the reply filed above is primafacie indicting the petitioner. There is sufficient evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged offense, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage. Simply because the petitioner could not be nabbed for 30 years, is not ground for granting bail. There is an allegation that the petitioner and his associates had links with militants. Thus, the petitioner fails to make a case for bail at this stage. However, he shall be at liberty to file a regular bail petition before the Sessions Court after surrendering, which shall decide the same without being influenced by its previous rejection of this order.
14. On 19.07.2024, while arguing the matter, Mr. A.P.S. Deol, Sr. Advocate, submitted that if this Court dismisses the petitioner, then the petitioner be given one week time to surrender and undertook to surrender before the concerned Court and had also sought liberty to file regular bail before the concerned Court, on merits. Given such a 12 12 of 13 ::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:096770 13 CRM-M-46915-2022 statement, let the petitioner surrender before the Sessions Court on 07.08.2024 by 11 AM. The petitioner shall be free to file a fresh bail petition on additional grounds. It is clarified that if such a petition is filed, the trial Court is requested to expedite the decision on the said bail petition. It is further clarified that the personal bail bonds of the petitioner shall stand canceled on Aug 07, 2024, at 11 AM.
15. The petition is dismissed. The interim order stands vacated. All pending applications, if any, stand closed.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
July 29, 2024
anju rani
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No.
13
13 of 13
::: Downloaded on - 01-08-2024 00:19:07 :::