High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/39652/2022dismissed

Sant Jarnail Dass v. State Of Punjab

2023-08-31Mr. Justice Deepak Sibal15 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 31.08.2023 Sant Jarnail Dass ....Petitioner versus State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Deepak Sibal

Present:

Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate and Mr. Farhad Kohli, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Luvinder Sofat, D.A.G., Punjab.

Mr. Sangram Saron, Advocate with Ms. Shubreet Kaur, Advocate, Mr. M.B. Rajwade, Advocate for the complainant. Deepak Sibal, J.

The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for the grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No.154 dated 07.11.2019 registered under Sections 302/120-B/34 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act (Offence under Sections 201 and 411 IPC and Sections 54/27 of the Arms Act, 1959 added later on) at Police Station Sadar Kotkapura, District Faridkot.

Sant Gagan Dass informed the police that on 07.11.2019 when he along with Gurdev Singh, Granthi Suba Singh and Sant Dayal Dass were sitting in the verandha of Dera Har Ka Dass in village Kot Sukhiya (for short - the Dera) 02 young men came on a motorcycle and after inquiring as to who out of the 03 persons was Sant Dayal Dass shot him dead. He

[ 2 ] suspected that the petitioner was behind the murder as the petitioner had a long standing grudge against the deceased.

After lodging the FIR in question the police constituted a Special Investigation Team headed by SP (Detective), Faridkot (for short - 1st SIT) and started to investigate the matter which included viewing of CCTV footage of the Dera and recording of statements of the disciples of the deceased. After such investigation the 1st SIT concluded that prior to the murder of the deceased co-accused Amarjit Singh @ Makhan and Harmeet Singh @ Rubal had conducted a recce of the Dera. Thereafter, coaccused Amrik Singh @ Sheru and Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha had come on 07.11.2019 on their Bajaj Pulsar Motorcycle and shot dead the deceased. The Punjab police then came to know that co-accused Amrik Singh @ Sheru and Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha had been arrested by the Madhya Pradesh police in FIR No.483 dated 28.11.

2019 registered under Sections 307/353/332/34 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act at police station Gathour, district Mandsour (Madhya Pradesh) and that from their possession a 7.26 mm pistol and .45 bore revolver had also been recovered. After procuring production warrants the Punjab police arrested Amrik Singh @ Sheru and Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha. Their interrogation revealed that the weapons recovered from them by the Madhya Pradesh police had been used by them to murder the deceased and that they had been supplied to them by co-accused Navtej Singh @ Bhola to whom these weapons had been supplied by co-accused Sukhprit Singh @ Budha and Sukhdool Singh @ Dulla @ Sukha. Co-accused Amrik Singh @ Sheru and Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha were then identified by the complainant to be the 02 young men who had shot dead the deceased on 07.11.

2019.

[ 3 ] identification was through a test identification parade conducted in the Court premises of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot. On the basis of the statements of co-accused Amrik Singh @ Sheru and Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha the motorcycle which was used in the crime was also fished out from a nearby canal. The motorcycle was then matched with the CCTV footage collected from the Dera. Thereafter, co-accused Amarjit Singh @ Makhan and Harmeet Singh @ Rubal were arrested. The petitioner could not be joined in investigation as he continued to abscond and this was in spite of the fact that in this regard, on 27.12.2019, the Punjab police had issued a look out circular (for short - LOC) 4.

Qua the co-accused who had already been arrested and with regard to whom investigation was complete, the Punjab police then filed a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. before the trial Court. In such report the petitioner was referred to as the prime suspect but it was further stated therein that investigation qua him could not be completed as he was absconding.

On 03.05.2021 the police arrested co-accused Navtej Singh @ Bhola and filed another report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. with regard to his involvement in the crime but since by that time also the petitioner continued to abscond, investigation qua his role remained pending. 6.

On 30.09.2021 one Sohan Dass who claimed himself to be a disciple of the petitioner filed a representation to Deputy Inspector General of Police, Faridkot Range, Faridkot, which was marked to Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga and in turn to Deputy Superintendent of Police (Headquarters), Moga, who, without associating the petitioner, through his inquiry report dated 18.10.2021 declared the petitioner to be

[ 4 ] innocent. Such report was also approved by the DIG, Faridkot Range, Faridkot on 16.11.2021 and on the basis thereof, on 23.11.2021, the petitioner's innocence was formally declared. 7.

In the meanwhile, in the trial being faced by the petitioner's co-accused the complainant appeared as PW1 and through his statement gave details with regard to the petitioner's involvement in the crime on the basis whereof the petitioner was summoned by the Trial Court under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to face trial alongwith his co-accused. It is at that stage that the petitioner knocked the doors of this Court through the instant petition seeking therein anticipatory bail.

Since, one of the primary grounds raised by the petitioner to seek anticipatory bail was him having been declared to be innocent by the police, this Court directed SSP, Moga to file an affidavit detailing therein the reasons as to why the petitioner had been declared to be innocent. Such affidavit was filed but the same was found to be vague. Therefore, as also because in a murder case the prime suspect had been declared to be innocent, the Inspector General of Police, Faridkot Range was directed to look into the matter and then file his own affidavit. For such purpose the Inspector General of Police, Faridkot Range constituted a SIT headed by Gagnesh Kumar, SP (Investigation), Faridkot (for short - 2nd SIT). 9.

On 30.12.2022 the 2nd SIT was re-constituted by the Inspector General of Police, Faridkot Range on the ground that the officers who were members of the SIT were already over burdened. The newly formed SIT (for short - the 3rd SIT) was now headed by Manmeet Singh, SP (Headquarters), Moga.

[ 5 ] 10.

In the meanwhile, the complainant filed a petition before this Court being CWP-2018-2023 through which he sought transfer of the investigation in the FIR in question to an independent authority. On being put to notice the State appeared before this Court and stated that a fresh SIT headed by R. S. Dhillon, DIG, Ferozepur Range (for short - the 4th SIT) had now been constituted to look into the matter. Apparently, the constitution of the 4th SIT satisfied the complainant and therefore, he withdrew his petition.

11.

On 06.03.2023, DIG, Ferozepur Range, Ferozepur again reconstituted the SIT and the new SIT (for short- the 5th SIT) was now headed by Randhir Kumar, SP/Investigation, Ferozepur. 12.

On being summoned by the 5th SIT the petitioner knocked the doors of this Court through CWP-6123-2023- Jarnail Dass v. State of Punjab and others, challenging therein the constitution of the 5th SIT and his summoning by it. However, such petition of his was dismissed as withdrawn on 17.04.2023 with liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to any alternative remedies that may be available to him. 13.

The 5th SIT repeatedly summoned the petitioner but he appeared before it only once and that too alongwith his lawyer. After considering the available evidence the 5th SIT found the petitioner to be the main conspirator behind the murder of Sant Dayal Dass and in its report the 5th SIT also noticed the petitioner's non-cooperative attitude. 14.

In the meanwhile, in the course of the afore investigations some evidence came to the fore that the petitioner had got himself declared to be innocent by paying bribe of Rs.1 crore. Irregularities in the inquiry which had declared the petitioner innocent were also found. Therefore, the

[ 6 ] State wrote to its Home Department to take appropriate action against DSP Ravinder Singh who was the Inquiry Officer who had declared the petitioner innocent as also against Surjit Singh who was the then DIG, Faridkot Range and was the officer who had approved the findings of innocence qua the petitioner. In this regard the State also wrote to its Vigilance Department to investigate the matter as to whether the petitioner had procured his innocence through corrupt means. 15.

On a complaint made by Sant Gopal Dass an FIR bearing No.64 dated 02.06.2023 under Sections 7, 7A, 8, 13(1)(b) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 120-B IPC has also been registered at police station Sadar Kotkapura, district Faridkot against some of the members of the 2nd SIT in which allegations are of them having demanded and received bribe to falsely implicate the petitioner. This matter is still under investigation.

16.

The police has also registered FIR No.235 dated 07.07.2023 under Section 409 IPC at police Station City Faridkot in which the allegations are with regard to loss of the police file pertaining to investigations conducted in the FIR lodged against the petitioner and his coaccused. The investigation in this case is also pending. 17.

On 18.07.2023, this Court adjourned the present petition to 24.07.2023 and in the meanwhile sought information from the State with regard to the action taken by the police in the afore referred FIR No. 64 dated 02.06.2023 registered under Sections 7, 7A, 8, 13(1)(b) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 120-B IPC at police station Sadar Kotkapura, District Faridkot and FIR No.235 dated 07.07.2023 registered under Section 409 IPC at police Station City Faridkot. Such

[ 7 ] order of this Court was challenged by the petitioner before the Supreme Court through Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.9358 of 2023 - Sant Jarnail Dass Vs. The State of Punjab which petition of his was disposed of on 11.08.2023 after recording therein observations that interim order dated 18.07.2023 does not affect the merits of the petitioner's case for the grant of pre-arrest bail. The Supreme Court further granted liberty to the petitioner to raise all the contentions and pursue his present petition as also requested this Court to decide the petitioner's petition expeditiously. 18.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a 70 year old man with no other criminal antecedents; after the petitioner had joined the investigation process the police declared him innocent and that he has only been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to face trial with his co-accused; there is no evidence against the petitioner except disclosure statements of co-accused which are not admissible in evidence; there is no motive on the part of the petitioner to conspire to murder Sant Dayal Dass as with regard to disputes between them he had taken recourse before the Civil Court; even before the 5th SIT the petitioner has joined investigation; the petitioner was never sought to be arrested during the entire process of investigation; therefore, at this stage, when the investigation is over there would be no useful purpose served to arrest him and that after 04 years of the lodging of the FIR there is no reason to put the petitioner behind the bars.

19.

On the other hand the learned State counsel sought the petitioner's custodial interrogation by submitting that the petitioner is the main conspirator behind the deceased's murder; for nearly 04 years the petitioner has not cooperated with the investigating agencies; for the initial

[ 8 ] 31⁄2 years the petitioner absconded; only after there was an interim stay with regard to his arrest did he appear before the 5th SIT but only alongwith his lawyer; even when he appeared before the 5th SIT he did not cooperate with the investigating agency; there is evidence that the petitioner had got himself declared innocent through corrupt means; in the case in hand there is involvement of at least 03 dreaded gangsters namely Sukhprit Singh @ Budha, Sukhdool Singh @ Dula and Navtej Singh @ Bhola as also are involved 02 known hitmen namely Lakhwinder Singh @ Lakha and Amrik Singh @ Sheru and that as to how the petitioner came in contact with the afore persons and how much money did he pay to them is something which needs a deep probe.

20.

Learned counsel for the parties have been heard and with their able assistance the record of the case has also been perused. 21.

The conclusion arrived at by the 5th SIT reads as under :-

" # $ % $ $ #

" & ' !

( #)

( *

! (

* !

! * !+ !

( *

"-*-

& ( #! .

&# ,

" -* ' /0

" 1 ' !

( #! 2(

[ 9 ] 30

" 4 4 - ( / (

2(&0

" , 5 ' $ '! * #! 4 0

3 (*

* ! # #! ,

" " -* ' (

( ( # , .

&# /0

'( 2(

2( / (

4 0

3 (*

3 !# .

&#/0

'( # (

( ( # #

! !# 6 7 .

&# " -* /0

'( "1

" $ # ( ,

& 6")2 $

&# " -* - #

(

( - .

(

( (.

2( 30

" 4 4 - ( .

&# 2(

(

( 5 ** + (

(

4 0

3"&

* * ! 2(

2( / (

7 .

&# " -* /0

'( "1

& ( !

" - ( !

2( / (

* ! !

+ 2(

% ! #

[ 10 ] & # % ' '% )

3#.(

7 3# .(

- ( ! '

7 3

9 .

3#.(

- ( !#7 #3 & 1 ,

7 #/

3 & ** # 1 ( #

: * 13 & .

1 !

; < *

# !

!# # ,

#7 -( ! 13 &

% -$ 3 % ' *

# .

/0 ' .

* /0 ' 8 7 .

9 .

* ! 9

9 ,

9 * ! 88

* * !

# # :

# .(

- ( ! !

# " - ( ! ,

* .(

-( ! ( 7 ! .

* !

[ 11 ] #7

* "#!

= $ ,

- ( ! 7 !

* 3# *

- ( ! # ** ,

#( ,

* 2(

2(.

&# /0

'( / 2(

2( .

-* !

(

( - (*

3 #

* ! #! ,

" " -* ' ** 1

7 ( &

( ,

*: ,

!* * 8 #! . *

## ,

! !

! *

# !

7 !&

%.>' * ,

! 3# .

.( -( ! !

! # !

# ,

$ %&

# #

. 8= *

[ 12 ] 9 $* 7&

* !

* #

** 8

. &# & ( !

# )=

$ . @# 1

6 1%1 ,

1&& 98"

1&'6 ==9"

. @# % 0#A.! .

6 ,

1&''6 =8 "

. B#% 0#A .! .

1 * # :

6 . # # . B# .

1 :

*! 9

7 ,

* ! !

0 .

&# " -* /0

'( "1

* !

-*' .

&# (

( - 2(

&# /0

'( "1 (& ( -( ! + (

(

(" -

3"-

4 0

3"&

* * ! 2(

2( / (

7 !

-( !%--* (

. 0

[ 13 ]

/ # *

$ ( #

* #

%;.>< '

;

<+ #

** ! ( !# * C

22.

The investigation qua the petitioner remains pending. In the investigation conducted so far, the petitioner is the prime suspect in the murder of Sant Dayal Dass. He is alleged to have conspired with dreaded gangsters and known hitmen to murder Sant Dayal Dass to wrest control of the Dera - a property said to be worth several crores of rupees. The hitmen and gangsters allegedly hired by the petitioner are those who are already involved in several criminal cases. As to how the petitioner got in touch with these hitmen/gangsters;

the mode and manner of the settlement/transfer of the blood money allegedly paid by the petitioner to these co-accused of his; if the petitioner had/has any direct links with them and details of the motive, if any, behind the murder of Sant Dayal Dass are some of the issues on which light can be shed only after the petitioner's custodial interrogation. These issues are inclusive and not exhaustive. 23.

Further, in the FIR in question, which was lodged on 07.11.2019, the petitioner was specifically named as the prime suspect behind Sant Dayal Dass's murder. Thereafter, for nearly 31⁄2 years, the petitioner absconded. He did not join the investigation process and this was in spite of the issuance of a LOC by the State requiring the petitioner presence before the investigating team. After over 31⁄2 years of the lodging

[ 14 ] of the FIR in question and only after the petitioner had interim protection with regard to stay of his arrest did he appear before the 5th SIT but that too in the company of his lawyer. However, even during such appearance, as per the report of the 5th SIT, he did not cooperate with the investigating agency.

24.

The petitioner's conduct of having absconded for the initial 31⁄2 years after lodging of the FIR in question and his uncooperative attitude towards the investigation are also factors to deny him anticipatory bail. 25.

The submission made on behalf of the petitioner that he had been declared innocent by the police and because he has only been summoned under section 319 Cr.P.C., he should be granted anticipatory bail needs to be considered only to be rejected. The inquiry on the basis whereof the petitioner pleads his innocence was admittedly an inquiry done by an officer who was not the investigating officer. Meaning thereby, it was a parallel inquiry which was undesirable. It is also not disputed that during the course of such inquiry the petitioner was never associated. Therefore, it is difficult to comprehend as to how the prime suspect in a murder case was declared innocent without having been even questioned. The 5th SIT has also found the said inquiry to be irregular and in this regard the State has written to its Home Department to take departmental action against the author of the report as also the authority which approved it. 26.

Further, during the course of investigation, evidence has surfaced that the inquiry declaring the petitioner to be innocent was procured by him through corrupt means. In this regard the State has already written to the Vigilance Bureau, Punjab to further investigate the matter.

[ 15 ] 27.

Interestingly, the petitioner is the only beneficiary of the afore inquiry declaring him to be innocent.

28.

Then there is FIR No. 235 dated 07.07.2023 registered under Section 409 IPC at police Station City Faridkot in which the matter with regard to loss of the entire police file in the FIR lodged against the petitioner and his co-accused is pending.

29.

The above are also the reasons which weigh with this Court to reject the petitioner's plea for the grant of anticipatory bail. 30.

Dismissed.

31.

It is clarified that the above observations have been made only for the limited purpose of deciding the present petition and the same would not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 31.08.2023 (Deepak Sibal) gk/sunil yadav Judge Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/ No Whether reportable : Yes/ No