Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1594 (PNJ)

Court on its own motion v. Ram Pal

2014-11-20

DARSHAN SINGH, M.JEYAPAUL

body2014
JUDGMENT Mr. M. Jeyapaul, J.: - This is a suo motu proceedings issued as against accused Ram Pal for cancellation of bail granted to him by this Court by virtue of the order passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge of this Court on 2.4.2008. 2. It is the case of the prosecution in FIR No.198 dated 12.7.2006 of P.S. Sadar, District Rohtak that a case was already registered at the instance of Chhudani Ashram against the disciples of accused Ram Pal of Satlok Ashram, Karontha in District Jhajjar. In connection with the said case, about 8 disciples of accused Ram Pal were arrested. Accused Ram Pal and his disciples blocked the road leading to Jhajjar from Rohtak for about 6 days and in that connection a panchayat consisting representatives of 27 villages was held in village Dighal with a view to settle the dispute in a peaceful manner by entering into a fruitful negotiation with accused Ram Pal and his disciples. 3. It is further alleged by the prosecution that on 12.7.2006 at about 12.30 noon, the above members of the panchayat proceeded towards the Ashram of accused Ram Pal for settling the dispute. But accused Ram Pal, his brother Mahender, his adopted son and his disciples climbed up the roof of their ashram and started pelting stones and opening fire on the villagers. In their defence, the villagers also collected those stones and launched a counter attack. The police officials as well as the District Administration reached the scene of occurrence. In spite of the warning given by them, accused Ram Pal and his disciples continued their firing. A number of persons received injuries and one Sonu was murdered in the occurrence. A case under Section 148, 149, 307, 302, 120-B and 323 IPC read with Section 25 of the Arms Act was registered against accused Ram Pal and others. 4. Accused Ram Pal moved an application praying for bail before the Addl.Sessions Judge, Rohtak. The Addl.Sessions Judge, Rohtak having adverted to the facts and circumstances of this case vide order dated 1.3.2007 came to a conclusion that it was not a fit case for grant of bail at that stage, as it was found that 59 persons were injured and one Sonu was murdered in the occurrence. 5. Accused Ram Pal thereafter preferred an application before this Court praying for grant of bail. 5. Accused Ram Pal thereafter preferred an application before this Court praying for grant of bail. It was contended on behalf of the prosecution during the course of hearing the plea for bail that accused Ram Pal also opened fire through his gun which later on recovered, as per the statement of one Manjit Singh recorded by the next day of occurrence. But it was resisted by accused Ram Pal contending that the first information report did not disclose that he also proceeded to the roof and opened fire alongwith other disciples. At any rate, the Hon’ble Single Judge of this Court considering the entire gamut of the facts and circumstances thought it fit to grant bail to accused Ram Pal on 2.4.2008. 6. In the present suo motu proceedings initiated for cancellation of bail, Sh.Gautam Dutt, Advocate who originally appeared for accused Ram Pal was put on notice. Thereafter, Sh.K.D.S.Hooda, Advocate replaced Sh.Gautam Dutt, Advocate and entered appearance for accused Ram Pal and filed his reply. 7. The reply submitted by accused Ram Pal would read that he never misused the concession of bail granted by this Court. Further, there is no allegation that he ever interfered with the course of investigation or attempted to tamper with the evidence or threatened the witnesses. It was further contended in the reply that he was not the root cause for the delay of the trial. His appearance was exempted by the trial Court and thereafter it was withdrawn. But this Court restored the order passed by the trial Court on 12.2.2014 granting exemption from appearance during the course of trial by accused Ram Pal. Accused Ram Pal has sought for dropping the proceedings initiated suo motu for cancellation of bail. 8. Learned Sr.Advocate Sh.Anupam Gupta, Amicus Curiae appointed by this Court submitted eloquently in his inimitable style that image of the Judiciary is at stake on account of the defiance shown by accused Ram Pal. The intervening circumstances emerged after the grant of bail to accused Ram Pal would disclose that he has chosen to threaten and overawe the Judiciary. Such a strategy adopted by accused while enjoying the concession of bail granted by this Court will definitely give a wrong signal to the public at large. The intervening circumstances emerged after the grant of bail to accused Ram Pal would disclose that he has chosen to threaten and overawe the Judiciary. Such a strategy adopted by accused while enjoying the concession of bail granted by this Court will definitely give a wrong signal to the public at large. The accused who is enjoying the extraordinary relief of participating in the trial proceedings through video conferencing facility arranged by the Sessions Judge, Hisar has virtually laid a siege to the District Court, Hisar. If such is the attitude of the accused who is enjoying bail, the trial will never progress as per schedule. Highlighting the conduct of accused Ram Pal in the aftermath of the non-bailable warrant issued by this Court, he would submit that accused Ram Pal would never be available either to face the trial or to receive the verdict from the Court. The accused who has chosen to overawe the public, the Police Authorities, the Administrators and the Judiciary cannot be permitted to enjoy the concession of bail granted by this Court. He brought to the notice of this Court that accused Ram Pal had chosen to form a Committee for the purpose of taming the Judiciary and the bureaucratic administration. It is imprudent to expect accused Ram Pal to participate effectively in the trial proceedings when he does not respect the Judiciary. Referring to the object of the Committee formed by the followers of accused Ram Pal, he would submit that accused Ram Pal will appear, if at all he is compelled to appear, for the hearing of trial only with thousands and thousands of followers. It is his last submission that the judicial system will be at peril, if such a defiant attitude of an accused who has got the privilege of bail in his favour brazenly exhibits his unruly might through his so-called followers and the private army formed by him. He also referred to various decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruling the field of cancellation of bail. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that accused Ram Pal by his conduct and behaviour had intimidated and threatened the judicial system. He has put to challenge not only the Judiciary but also the Administration of the State. In the above circumstances, accused Rampal will never appear before the trial Court to receive the verdict. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that accused Ram Pal by his conduct and behaviour had intimidated and threatened the judicial system. He has put to challenge not only the Judiciary but also the Administration of the State. In the above circumstances, accused Rampal will never appear before the trial Court to receive the verdict. Therefore, it is his submission that the bail granted to accused Ram Pal is liable to be cancelled. 10. Learned counsel appearing for accused Ram Pal would submit that there was no reason for cancellation of bail as he has not disobeyed the orders of the trial Court. Never had he tampered with the witnesses, nor had he intentionally delayed the course of trial. Infact, his appearance before the trial Court during the course of trial proceedings has been dispensed with as per the orders passed by this Court in the revision filed by accused Ram Pal. When his appearance before the trial Court was dispensed with and he had not disobeyed any direction of the trial Court to appear before it, the question of cancellation of bail would not arise, he would submit. 11. Let us deal with certain decisions governing the field of cancellation of bail. In Puran vs. Rambilas and another, (2001) 6 SCC 338 , the Hon’ble Supreme Court has emphatically held as follows:- “14. .... This Court held that the frame of sub-section (2) of Section 439 indicates that it is a power conferred on the courts mentioned therein. It was held that there was nothing to indicate that the said power can be exercised only if the State or investigating agency or a Public Prosecutor moves a petition. It was held that the power so vested in the High Court can be invoked either by the State or by any aggrieved party. It was held that the said power could also be exercised suo motu by the High Court. It was held that, therefore, any member of the public, whether he belongs to any particular profession of otherwise could move the High Court to remind of the need to exercise its power suo motu.” 12. It was held that the said power could also be exercised suo motu by the High Court. It was held that, therefore, any member of the public, whether he belongs to any particular profession of otherwise could move the High Court to remind of the need to exercise its power suo motu.” 12. The issue whether the High Court has the authority to initiate proceedings suo motu for cancellation of bail has been authoritatively decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case to the effect that this Court has the power to invoke Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. to take suo motu proceedings for cancellation of bail granted to an accused. 13. The principal rule to guide release on bail should be to secure the presence of the applicant who seeks to be liberated to take judgement and serve sentence in the event of Court punishing him with imprisonment. (Refer, Babu Singh and others vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1978 Supreme Court 527). 14. While cancelling the bail under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C., the primary conditions which weigh with the Court are whether the accused is likely to tamper with the evidence or interfere or attempt to interfere with the due course of justice or evade the due course of justice. [Refer, Kanwar Singh Meena vs. State of Rajasthan and another, (2012) 12 SCC 180 ]. 15. Cancellation of bail necessarily involves the review of a decision already made and can by and large be permitted only if, by reason of supervening circumstances, it would be no longer conducive for a fair trial to allow the accused to retain his freedom during the trial. (Refer, The State through the Delhi Administration vs. Sanjay Gandhi, AIR 1978 Supreme Court 961). 16. In Sant Ram vs. State of Haryana and others, 1994 Supp(2) Supreme Court Cases 205, it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that in order to maintain a terror free atmosphere during the trial proceedings, the bail granted to an accused can be cancelled invoking Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. 17. 16. In Sant Ram vs. State of Haryana and others, 1994 Supp(2) Supreme Court Cases 205, it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that in order to maintain a terror free atmosphere during the trial proceedings, the bail granted to an accused can be cancelled invoking Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. 17. Even in a case where an accused was trying to adopt dilatory tactics resulting in delay of trial or has absconded or the offence committed by him has created serious law and order problem or the accused chose to misuse the privilege of bail granted to him, the Court is competent to invoke Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail. [Refer, State of Gujarat vs. Salimbhai Abdulgaffar Shaikh and others, (2003) 8 Supreme Court Cases 50]. 18. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dolat Ram and others vs. State of Haryana, (1995) 1 Supreme Court Cases 349, has held as follows:- “4. .... Generally speaking, the grounds for cancellation of bail, broadly (illustrative and not exhaustive) are: interference or attempt to interfere with the due course of administration of justice or evasion or attempt to evade the due course of justice or abuse of the concession granted to the accused in any manner. The satisfaction of the court, on the basis of material placed on the record of the possibility of the accused absconding is yet another reason justifying the cancellation of bail.” 19. If an accused, in order to get away from the clutches of law, indulges in various activities creating problems of law and order situation, he cannot continue to enjoy the privilege of bail granted to him. [Refer, Panchanan Mishra vs. Digambar Mishra and others, (2005) 3 Supreme Court Cases 143.] 20. The conduct subsequent to release on bail and the supervening circumstances are relevant factors to take note of while cancelling the bail to an accused. [Refer, State of U.P. through CBI vs. Amarmani Tripathi, (2005) 8 Supreme Court Cases 21.] 21. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Central Bureau of Investigation, Hyderabad vs. Subramani Gopalakrishnan and another, [2011(5) Law Herald (SC) 3381] : (2011), 5 SCC 296 has held as follows:- “23. It is also relevant to note that there is difference between yardsticks for cancellation of bail and appeal against the order granting bail. Very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order directing the cancellation of bail already granted. It is also relevant to note that there is difference between yardsticks for cancellation of bail and appeal against the order granting bail. Very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order directing the cancellation of bail already granted. Generally speaking, the grounds for cancellation of bail are, interference or attempt to interfere with the due course of administration of justice or evasion or attempt to evade the due course of justice or abuse of the concessions granted to the accused in any manner. These are all only few illustrative materials. The satisfaction of the court on the basis of the materials placed on record of the possibility of the accused absconding is another reason justifying the cancellation of bail. In other words, bail once granted should not be cancelled in a mechanical manner without considering whether any supervening circumstances have rendered it no longer conducive to a fair trial to allow the accused to retain his freedom by enjoying the concession of bail during the trial.” 22. In the above background of the law enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and also in the light of the submissions made by learned counsel appearing on either side based on the materials produced before this Court, we will have to decide whether that accused Ram Pal by his conduct has courted withdrawal of concession of bail granted to him. 23. It is a mater of fact that Ram Pal’s disciples/followers set up an organization in the name and style of National Social Security Committee (for short ‘the Committee’) on 14.8.2010. The said Committee was formed by the disciples of accused Ram Pal with the prime object to tame not only the bureaucracy, police officers, political establishment but also the Judiciary. As per the resolution passed by them to form the said Committee, they have even prepared to sacrifice their lives in order to protect Ram Pal. The Committee has taken a vow that it will not allow accused Ram Pal to proceed to the police authorities or the Court to attend any hearing of case falsely booked as against him. 24. The confidential communication sent by learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak dated 21.7.2014 throws a discernible light on the conduct and behaviuor of not only accused Ram Pal, but also his disciples/followers. He has succinctly portrayed what transpired during the trial proceedings of this case. 24. The confidential communication sent by learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak dated 21.7.2014 throws a discernible light on the conduct and behaviuor of not only accused Ram Pal, but also his disciples/followers. He has succinctly portrayed what transpired during the trial proceedings of this case. He infact exempted the personal appearance of accused Ram Pal till further orders by virtue of his order dated 12.2.2014. As he felt that no effective trial hearing took place in a case which has been pending since 2006 and the exemption from appearance granted to accused Ram Pal did not yield the desired result, he was pleased to recall the said order dated 6.6.2014. 25. On 11.7.2014, surprisingly an application was moved by the prosecution for granting permission for accused Ram Pal to appear through video conferencing from the office of learned District & Sessions Judge, Hisar. As accused Ram Pal expressed no objection for such a course contemplated by the prosecution, the application was allowed. 26. In the meantime, the order passed on 6.6.2014 by learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak recalling the order passed by him on 12.2.2014 granting exemption from personal appearance until further orders was put to challenge by accused Ram Pal before this Court in CRM-M-23009 of 2014. The Hon’ble Single Judge of this Court finding that there was no objection from learned counsel appearing for the State, allowed the revision filed by accused Ram Pal setting aside the order passed on 12.2.2014 by learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak by virtue of the order dated 29.9.2014. As a consequence, the order passed on 6.6.2014 granting exemption to accused Ram Pal from appearance during trial until further orders was restored. Accused Ram Pal had appeared before the trial Court only for three trial hearings, namely, 24.8.2009, 6.1.2010 and 2.4.2010. From 2.4.2010 to 14.7.2014, he had sought personal exemption from appearance for 42 times. Learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak was pleased to grant exemption during those hearings. 27. Learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak was pained to inform the High Court that right from the year 2006 the disciples/followers of accused Ram Pal made complaints against all the Judicial Officers who dealt with the case. Even defamatory articles were published by the disciples/followers of accused Ram Pal against the Presiding Officers in a magazine circulated by them. Lakhs of copies of those magazine were distributed for the consumption of general public. Even defamatory articles were published by the disciples/followers of accused Ram Pal against the Presiding Officers in a magazine circulated by them. Lakhs of copies of those magazine were distributed for the consumption of general public. Learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak has informed this Court that such tactics have been adopted by accused Ram Pal and his followers with an intention to threaten and overawe the Judicial Officers who had the temerity to deal with the murder case launched as against accused Ram Pal and others. 28. The fact remains that accused Ram Pal through his followers/disciples had not spared even the Judges of this Court. Almost all the Judges who happened to deal with his case were shown in dim light by the disciples/followers of Ram Pal. 29. On 14.7.2014, accused Ram Pal appeared through video conferencing during the course of trial conducted by the learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak. As per the arrangement, accused Ram Pal appeared in the video conferencing facility organized in the District Court, Hisar and the trial was conducted by learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak. On that day thousands of followers of accused Ram Pal virtually laid siege to the town of Hisar and Rohtak. Processions holding banners were held in both the towns. The banners displayed derogatory remarks against the Judicial Officers who happened to deal with the murder case and also against the learned Sessions Judge who is presently dealing with the case. The intolerable behaviour of the supporters of accused Ram Pal was amply covered by the media during the hearing on 14.7.2014. Infact, learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak had received threat to his life by the followers of accused Ram Pal just because he happened to deal with the Sessions case. 30. The District Bar Association, Hisar vide their Resolution dated 14.7.2014 came out with the complaint of lawlessness in the District Court Campus, Hisar during the course of video conferencing that took place on the said day. As per the Resolution passed by the District Bar Association, Hisar about 50,000 followers of accused Ram Pal surrounded the Court complex. Amongst them, about 10,000 private commandos of accused Ram Pal wearing black clothes formed a human chain laying siege to the District Court Complex. They did not allow the litigants to have access to the Court Complex to participate in the Court hearings. Amongst them, about 10,000 private commandos of accused Ram Pal wearing black clothes formed a human chain laying siege to the District Court Complex. They did not allow the litigants to have access to the Court Complex to participate in the Court hearings. Surprisingly, the Advocates were directed by those private commandos engaged by accused Ram Pal to flash the identity card to gain access into the Court. The Advocates who had failed to display their identity cards were declined access to the Court Complex by the private commandos engaged by accused Ram Pal. The Advocates who objected to such an abnormal practice without any semblance of authority were manhandled by the private commandos. The District Bar Association, Hisar has further disclosed in their Resolution that followers of accused Ram Pal raised slogans against the Judges. The slogans were found written in banners carried by them. The followers also entered brazenly with arms into the Court Complex. 31. Learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak through his further confidential communication sent to the High Court on 2.8.2014 informed the High Court that the followers of accused Ram Pal have published books containing malicious and defamatory articles against the Judicial Officers and distributed those books for the consumption of general public with a view to malign the image of the judicial institution. He has also annexed two sets of books published by the followers of accused Ram Pal. 32. This Court has separately initiated suo motu contempt proceedings as against accused Ram Pal and others based on the confidential communication sent by learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak and the Resolution passed and sent by the District Bar Association, Hisar. In the contempt proceedings, we issued summons to accused Ram Pal. But the President of National Social Service Committee had the audacity to request Sub Divisional Officer, Chandigarh to make necessary arrangement for food and shelter in Chandigarh for about 1 lac disciples/followers who had proposed to throng the city of Chandigarh to participate in the hearing of the contempt proceedings. This Court firmly declined the application moved by the Administration of U.T., Chandigarh for adjournment of the hearing on the ground that lot of ‘Police Bandobast’ had to be arranged on account of such a threat emanated from the President of the said Committee. 33. The summons issued to accused Ram Pal did not yield any result. This Court firmly declined the application moved by the Administration of U.T., Chandigarh for adjournment of the hearing on the ground that lot of ‘Police Bandobast’ had to be arranged on account of such a threat emanated from the President of the said Committee. 33. The summons issued to accused Ram Pal did not yield any result. In spite of the fact that he is staying in his ashram at Barwala, Hisar, he has not chosen to appear before the Court to face the contempt. A plea for adjournment on spurious medical ground set up by accused Ram Pal was rejected outright by this Court. Resultantly, non-bailable warrant was issued as against him. Responding to the non-bailable warrant issued by this Court, the followers/disciples have gathered in large numbers at the portals of ashram preventing effectively the police force to execute the warrant issued by this Court. Even the private commandos engaged by accused Ram Pal and his followers have started protecting accused Ram Pal from obeying the orders of this Court. 34. Rampal has set up through his followers an Organization to unnerve and terrify the judicial system in the guise of getting protection to him through his followers/disciples. Not only the Judiciary, but also the Administration of the State has been pooh-poohed by him through his followers. His conduct and behaviour would unerringly indicate that he had no respect or regard for the Judiciary. By circulating defamatory materials as against the Judges who happened to deal with his case, he had made an attempt to bully and frighten the Judges so that they would not venture to take up his case and thereby he could conveniently delay the trial proceedings. 35. The District Court, Hisar as well as the District Court, Rohtak had received a shock of its life by the very presence of thousands and thousands of followers in the guise of giving protection to accused Ram Pal during the trial hearing. Wrong information had been disseminated on during such course of action by the followers of accused Ram Pal to the public consumption with a view to mobilize a faux public opinion about the Judiciary. He had not appeared before the trial Court for about 42 hearings and as a result of which the trial which started in the year 2009 could not make any headway. He had not appeared before the trial Court for about 42 hearings and as a result of which the trial which started in the year 2009 could not make any headway. Even the shrewd tactics adopted by learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak to conduct the proceedings directing accused Ram Pal to appear through video conferencing was completely outsmarted and circumvented by the followers of accused Ram Pal. He had not responded to the summons issued by this Court to face contempt. The non-bailable warrants issued could not be executed by the Police Authorities as he had chosen to form a human shield to protect himself. He had also engaged private protection force to overawe the judicial system, the Police Authorities and the State Administration. We do not have any doubt, in the facts and circumstances of this case, that his followers/disciples reflect, in their conduct and behaviour, the command of accused Rampal. In our considered view, he has completely misused the concession of bail granted to him. 36. Learned Sessions Judge vide his order dated 12.2.2014 has not passed a blanket order giving exemption throughout the trial proceedings. He has passed an order exempting appearance of accused Ram Pal until further orders. Of course, that was recalled by him vide his order dated 6.6.2014. That was put to challenge before this Court in CRM-M-23009 of 2014. This Court restored the order dated 12.2.2014 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak. As per the order passed by the trial Court on 12.2.2014, the exemption granted to accused Ram Pal would be in operation till any further order is passed by it. Learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak has rightly passed a modified order on 11.7.2014 insisting the appearance of accused Ram Pal through video conferencing to participate in the trial for the hearing on 14.7.2014 with the full consent of accused Ram Pal. The order passed by this Court in CRM-M-23009 of 2014 has since been neutralized. Therefore, the submission made by learned counsel appearing for accused Ram Pal that the accused is not supposed to appear throughout the trial proceedings is totally misconceived. 37. In our view, accused Ram Pal, who has been elusive to the warrant of arrest issued by the Court in the collateral proceedings of the murder case pending as against him, would not appear before the trial Court even through video conferencing. 37. In our view, accused Ram Pal, who has been elusive to the warrant of arrest issued by the Court in the collateral proceedings of the murder case pending as against him, would not appear before the trial Court even through video conferencing. Even if he appears through video conferencing to participate in the trial, he will prefer to show his muscle power by giving a call to his followers/disciples to come in large numbers to terrorize the whole system. Such a behviour is not expected of an accused who has got the concession of bail. We also take judicial notice of the subsequent development in which his followers/disciples/private commandos have waged war against the State which just endeavoured to put to execution the warrant of arrest pending for long. The Police force stationed for number of days in front of ashram, the media personnel and the followers/disciples of accused Rampal have suffered injuries of various dimensions during the course of implementation of the order passed by the Court. Such an accused will never make his appearance to receive the verdict. It will be a travesty of justice if he is allowed even for a minute to enjoy the concession of bail granted by this Court. 38. Therefore, the order passed by this Court on 2.4.2008 granting bail to accused Ram Pal stands cancelled. He be arrested forthwith and committed to jail. The personal bond/surety bond executed by the accused/sureties stand discharged. 39. The suo motu proceedings are thus concluded. ---------0.B.S.0------------ —————————