Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

11. In the same manner, RC No.3(S)/97/SIU-XVI/JMU dated 27.2.1997 was registered against the petitioners-accused on the ground that they have CRM Nos. M-7861 of 2005 (alongwith connected petitions) -14- kidnapped Jagdeep Singh on 18.11.1992 and when his mother-in-law intervened, she was shot dead. Subsequently, Jagdeep Singh was also eliminated in a fake police encounter on 30.11.1992. In RC No.7(S)/97/SIU-XVI/JMU dated 27.2.1997, a criminal case was registered with the allegations that Balwinder Singh of village Jhabbal, was illegally kidnapped by the police party and his whereabouts are not known. Similarly, other cases were also registered against the accused for kidnapping and eliminating Gurdev Singh from village Galalipur, Distt.Amritsar, Sukhwinder Singh, Arur Singh of village Manochahal and three others, Gurbinder Singh from village Pheruman, Daljit Singh from village Khaila, Balbir Singh, Piara Singh (Ex-serviceman), Harphool Singh, Gurdip Singh of village Jiobala, Kesar Singh son of Banta Singh, Gurdev Singh alias Jagdev Singh from village Beni, Gurmej Singh son of Kesar Singh and his son Balwant Singh, Meja Singh, Baba Charan Singh, Kuldeep Singh and others. I have carefully perused the CBI and counter Punjab Police versions in all the cases. Instead of repeating the sequence of events in all cases and in order to avoid the repetition, suffice it to say that the similar allegations of hatching criminal conspiracy, abduction, kidnapping, murder, illegal detention, fake encounter, preparing false record of encounter, concocting the false story and registering the false cases, have also been assigned to all the accused in all connected matters in this relevant connection.

12. Levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events in detail, mentioned in the respective charge sheets, like (Annexure P2), in all, the CBI claimed that all the petitioners-accused hatched a criminal conspiracy, to do an illegal act by illegal means, picked up the helpless persons (deceased) from their respective residences & other places, abducted, kidnapped in order to murder, illegally detained, brutally tortured, staged drama of false encounters, murder them and cremated their dead bodies as unidentified, without any post- mortem examinations, in order to cause disappearance of evidence of offence to CRM Nos. M-7861 of 2005 (alongwith connected petitions) -15- screen the offenders. Not only that, subsequently, those persons (deceased) were brutally killed by the petitioners-accused, in the manner depicted hereinbefore. On the contrary, the police officers have lodged false cases, concocted false version of encounters and prepared the false record in this relevant direction. The story/version put forth by the police and the recovery of the articles, weapons used were found to be totally false in a professional & scientific investigation by the CBI. In the background of these allegations, the CBI has registered the different RCs against the present accused, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 342, 364, 365, 302 and 201 read with Section 34 IPC in the manner described hereinabove.

26. As is evident from the record that the CBI claimed that all the petitioners-accused hatched a criminal conspiracy, to do an illegal act by illegal means, picked up the deceased persons from their respective residences & other places, abducted, kidnapped in order to murder, illegally detained, brutally CRM Nos. M-7861 of 2005 (alongwith connected petitions) -20- tortured, staged drama of false encounters, murder them and cremated their dead bodies as unidentified, without post-mortem examinations, in order to cause disappearance of evidence of offence to screen the offenders. Not only that, those persons (deceased) were brutally killed in the manner depicted hereinbefore, but on the contrary, the police officers have lodged false cases, concocted false version of encounters and prepared the false record in this relevant behalf. To my mind, such barbaric acts complained of, cannot possibly be termed, by any stretch of imagination that, they have any remote nexus in performance of their official duties to achieve the purpose of section 4 and in exercise of powers conferred by Sections 4 & 5 of the amended Act.

41. Likewise, the arguments of learned counsel for CBI have considerable force and the contrary contentions of learned counsel for petitioners- accused pale into insignificance, "stricto sensu" deserve to be and are hereby repelled under the present set of circumstances, as the ratio of law laid down in the aforesaid judgments "mutatis mutandis" is applicable to the facts of the instant cases and is the complete answer to the problem in hand.

42. Therefore, if the acts of, heinous offences, hatching a criminal conspiracy, to do an illegal act by illegal means, picked up the helpless persons (deceased) from their respective residences & other places, abducted, kidnapped in order to murder, illegally detained, brutally tortured, staged drama of false encounters, murder them and cremated their dead bodies as unidentified, without post-mortem examinations, in order to cause disappearance of evidence of offence to screen the offenders, not only that, those persons (deceased) were brutally killed in the indicated manner, but the police officers have lodged false cases, concocted false version of encounters and prepared the false record in this relevant connection and totality of the other facts & special circumstances, material and legal position as discussed here-in-above, are put together and analyzed in a right perspective, then, to my mind, the conclusion is inescapable and irresistible that the commission of such heinous offences, indeed, cannot and would not be termed to have any remote connection with the acts complained of in exercise of powers conferred by Section 4 of the amended Act. The petitioners-accused are at all CRM Nos. M-7861 of 2005 (alongwith connected petitions) -28- neither entitled to the umbrella of protection under section 6 of the amended Act nor under section 197 Cr.PC. Thus, no sanction whatsoever is legally required to prosecute them for commission of the pointed heinous offences in this relevant behalf.