Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 538 (PNJ)

Bikram Jit Singh v. State of Punjab

2019-02-15

RAMENDRA JAIN

body2019
ORDER : RAMENDRA JAIN, J. 1. Prayer in this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been made for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, in case, FIR No.130, dated 21.10.2015, registered under Sections 302, 307, 34 IPC (offence under Sections 218, 120-B IPC added later on) and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959, at Police Station Bajakhana, District Faridkot. 2. According to the prosecution, on 01.06.2015, a sacrilege incident took place in Gurudwara at Burj Jawahar Singhwala, District Faridkot. Therefore, FIR No.63 dated 02.06.2015, under Sections 295-A and 380 IPC was registered at Police Station Bajakhana, District Faridkot. Thereafter, similar incident took place on 25.09.2015, wherein two hand-written posters containing sacrilegious content were pasted near a Gurudwara. Consequently, second FIR No.117 dated 25.09.2015 was registered under Section 295-A IPC, Police Station Bajakhana, District Faridkot. Again on 12.10.2015, in a third incident torn pages of holly Shri Guru Granth Sahib were found scattered in village Barghari. Consequently, on the complaint of Kulwinder Singh, Manager of the said Gurudwara, FIR No.128 dated 12.10.2015, under Sections 295-A and 120-B IPC was registered at Police Station Bajakhana, District Faridkot. Thereafter, mass protests were made by the general public in between 12.10.2015 to 14.10.2015 at villages Kotkapura and Behbal Kalan against the above said three incidents of sacrilege and inaction of the police, which led to firing by the police, causing injuries to certain protesters and death of two of them. 3. As a result, FIR No.129 dated 14.10.2015 was registered under Sections 307 IPC, Police Station Baja Khana and under Arms Act for destruction of public property. On the same day, FIR No.192 was registered at Police Station Kotakpura for similar offences. 4. State government observing that situation may further deteriorate, appointed inquiry commission headed by Justice Jora Singh (Retd.) to inquire into the aforesaid incidents of sacrilege and police firing on 14.10.2015 at village Kotkapura and Behbalkalan, who gave his report on 29.06.2016. 5. On perusal of report of inquiry commission, Government formed an opinion that three basic questions were not specifically answered. Therefore, rejecting the report as inconclusive ordered for another commission of inquiry headed by Justice Ranjit Singh (Retd.), who gave his report against one of the accused responsible for firing incident, which took place on 14.10.2015. That is how, the petitioner is before this Court. 6. Therefore, rejecting the report as inconclusive ordered for another commission of inquiry headed by Justice Ranjit Singh (Retd.), who gave his report against one of the accused responsible for firing incident, which took place on 14.10.2015. That is how, the petitioner is before this Court. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that SIT did not investigate independently against the petitioner and his co-accused, but simply on the basis of commission's report given by Justice Ranjit Singh (Retd.), falsely involved the petitioner. The petitioner was empty handed. As per prosecution story, he did not fire upon the mob. He has falsely been implicated in the instant case. 7. Mr. Hittan Nehra, Additional Advocate General, Punjab has appeared on his own on behalf of the respondent-State. He filing reply by way of affidavit of Mr. Satinder Singh, Senior Superintendent of Police, Kapurthala-Crime-cum-Member Special Investigation Team, submits that injured Beant Singh in his statement before the police specifically named the petitioner that on his direction Sub-Inspector Amarjit Singh had fired on Krishan Bhagwan, who ultimately died. No permission was taken from the Duty Magistrate before opening fire upon the mob, despite the fact that Naib Tehsildar, Pritpal as Duty Magistrate was present on the spot. The mob was sitting in a peaceful manner, raising protest on sacrilege incident. However, SSP Charanjit Singh and Pardeep Singh along with other police officials started misbehaving with the mob, then it turned violent, in which two persons died in the impugned fire incident. 8. He further refuting the above submissions, contends that the matter is still under investigation before Special Investigation Team, which has been constituted by the State on 10.09.2018 headed by Mr. Parbodh Kumar, Director Bureau of Investigation. Therefore, in case, petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, he would try his level best to hamper the investigation. His custodial interrogation is required. Further arguments raised by learned State counsel leads to investigation part, which needs not be mentioned. 9. Having given thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions, this Court is of the considered opinion that petitioner is not required for any custodial interrogation, inasmuch as, firing incident took place while petitioner was on duty. His custodial interrogation is required. Further arguments raised by learned State counsel leads to investigation part, which needs not be mentioned. 9. Having given thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions, this Court is of the considered opinion that petitioner is not required for any custodial interrogation, inasmuch as, firing incident took place while petitioner was on duty. Police party fired on the mob, which was gathered in an illegal manner, despite issuance of proclamation under Section 144 Cr.P.C. In normal circumstance, no police official fires on the mob, unless, it is direly needed to avoid a troublesome situation by mob. 10. List on 21.05.2019. 11. In the meantime, the petitioner shall join the investigation and would come present as and when called for and in the event of arrest, he shall be admitted to interim bail on his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall also abide by the conditions as specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 12. To be heard along with CRM-M-6694-2019.