Bathinda Custodial Death Case

1
State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC
In the Court of M.P.Singh Pahwa, Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda. Sessions Case No.01 dated 06.01.200 . !" No.1 dated 1#.0$.2012. %e&ided on'10.01.201(. SC)000016$)201*
State
Versus
1. Gurjeet Singh son of Daman Singh son of Jawala Singh age! a"out #0 $ears Internal Vigilance Chan!igarh as DSP resi!ent of %uarter &o.# Police lines 'athin!a (since Proclaime! )ffen!er*. 2. 'arjin!er +umar son of Surin!er +umar son of +aram Chan! age! a"out ## $ears ,-.Ins/ector r0o VP) Golla Pasa 1u!hiana. 3. 1a2h3ir Singh son of Jaswant Singh son of Sarwan Singh age! a"out #4 $ears 5SI Police 1ines 'atala resi!ent of 6ohalla &ana2sar 'ajwa 7ali Gali 8aran 8aran District 5mritsar (now !ea!*9 :. Gur"achan Singh son of ;a2am Singh son of 'agga Singh age! a"out #< $ears 5SI in Police 1ine 6ansa resi!ent of ;.&o.1<0== 'ac2si!e >ose Gar!en &ational Colon$ 'athin!a9 #. Pal Singh son of In!er Singh son of Suchet Singh age! #2 $ears ;ea! Consta"le &o.1242 Cit$ Police Station +a/urthala now resi!ent of %uarter &o.:0 Police 1ines +a/urthala (now !ea!* 1alton +alan District
<. 6al Singh son of 5ssa Singh son of Jagat Singh age! a"out << $ears retire! ;ea! Consta"le resi!ent of ;.&o.241:1 &aruana >oa! Gali &o.= 5mar/ura 'asti 'athin!a9 4. ;arin!er Singh son of Jiwan Singh son of 'har/ur Singh age! a"out :: $ears ;ea! Consta"le District 6ansa r0o &angal +alan now r0o +esar 7a2il 7ali Gali near District Courts 6ansa ?. +anwaljit Singh son of Gur!ial Singh son of 'hajan Singh age! a"out :? $ears Consta"le resi!ent of Sucha Singh &agar Gali &o.# ;ouse &o.1#00# 'athin!a9 =. 8arlo2 Singh son of +ha@an Singh son of 7a!hawa Singh age! a"out <3 $ears retire! Consta"le resi!ent of ;.&o.2<: 3illage >ajouli District 5m"ala (;ar$ana* 10. Jagsir Singh son of Chhotu Singh son of 6ita Singh age! a"out :< $ears P;G now un!er sus/ension resi!ent of 3illage Jhan!u Patti Chughe +alan 8ehsil an! District 'athin!a9 11. Jarnail Singh son of +aram Singh son of Chattar Singh age! a"out :# $ears P;G now or!erl$ of DSP(>* 'athin!a resi!ent of Village 'am"iha 8ehsil an! District 'athin!a. A 5ccuse!
+.I.!. No.$0 %ated 2$.*.1,,,. -nder Se&tion *6 )*(2)22*)1,*)120.B)*02 IPC Poli&e Station /otwali, Bathinda. .00000.
Case &o11itted 23 Sh.!a4ee5 Malhotra, PCS, learned Chief Judi&ial Magistrate, Bathinda 5ide order dated 2*.12.200(. .00000. PresentB 6r.S.+.+ochhar 5!!itional Pu"lic Prosecutor assiste! "$ 6r.G.S.Si!hu 5!3ocate for the State. 5ccuse! Gurjeet Singh Proclaime! )ffen!er 5ccuse! 1a2h"ir Singh an! Pal Singh !ie! an! /rocee!ings against them a"ate!. >emaining accuse! on "ail with counsel 6r.G.S.+ha!ial.
Judg1ent' 1* 8he a"o3e sai! accuse! ha3e "een challane! "$ /olice of Police
Station +otwali 'athin!a 3i!e CI> &o.40 !ate! 24.3.1=== for offences un!er Section 3<: 3:2 223 22< 1:3 120.' IPC an! then case has "een committe! to the Court of Sessions "$ the Court of Sh.>aji3 6alhotra then learne! Chief Ju!icial 6agistrate 'athin!a 3i!e commitment or!er !ate! 23.12.200:. 2* 'rief facts of the case of /rosecution are that com/lainant
Gur!it Singh son of In!er Singh resi!ent of Guru Go"in! Singh &agar Gali &o.13 7ar! &o.: 'athin!a mo3e! a//lication a!!resse! to SSP 'athin!a. It was re3eale! in the a//lication that on 14.4.1==2 his son Paramjit Singh was /ic2e! u/ "$ some /olice officials (in ci3il !ress* from his flour mill (5tta Cha22i*. 1ater on from enDuir$ he came to 2now that Gurjeet Singh Ins/ector 5SI 'arjin!er +umar Sharma 5SI 1a2h"ir Singh along with 4.? other /olice officials which were shown /resent in CI> &o.#1 were those /ersons who ha3e lifte! his son. Com/lainant claime! that he can i!entif$ those /ersons if
/ro!uce! "efore him. It was further !isclose! in this a//lication that com/lainant file! Criminal 7rit Petition &o.?300=: in ;igh Court wherein SSP 'athin!a has shown arrest of his son in case CI> &o.#1 !ate! 14.4.1==2. It was also !isclose! "$ SSP (in the a"o3e sai! 7rit Petition* that Paramjit Singh was "eing ta2en u/ in /olice custo!$ for reco3er$ of wea/ons an! !uring that time he esca/e! along with han!cuff from the /olice custo!$. 8he ;onE"le ;igh Court !i! not acce/t this 3ersion of the /olice an! referre! matter to Sessions Ju!ge 'athin!a for enDuir$. 1earne! Sessions Ju!ge 'athin!a foun! the /olice 3ersion regar!ing esca/e of Paramjit Singh as false an! the 3ersion /ut forth "$ him was acce/te! true. )n the "asis of this enDuir$ re/ort ;onE"le ;igh Court got war!e! >s.1 #0 0000. as com/ensation to the com/lainant an! other legal heirs of Paramjit Singh. DGP Punja" was !irecte! to ta2e action against the erring /olice officials. 8he com/lainant /referre! a//eal "efore the ;onE"le Su/reme Court against this or!er of ;onE"le ;igh Court an! the ;onE"le Su/reme Court o"ser3e! that com/lainant is at li"ert$ to ta2e ste/s for registration of CI>. It was also !isclose! in the a//lication that the com/lainant has alrea!$ !es/atche! co/$ of the or!er of ;onE"le Su/reme Court as well as ;onE"le ;igh Court with his legal notice !ate! 11.2.1=== sent through his counsel. 8he com/lainant reDueste! for registration of CI> un!er Section 3<:030203:0201 IPC against Gurjeet Singh an! his other associate /olice officials as his son was foun! in /olice custo!$ at the last time. 8hereafter
nothing has "een hear! a"out him. Crom the circumstances it is clear that Gurjeet Singh an! other /olice officials referre! in CI> &o.#1 !ate! 14.4.1==2 (3i!e which Paramjit Singh is shown as esca/e!* has "een !one to !eath an! the /olice has !estro$e! his !ea! "o!$. )n recei/t of this information then DIG Cari!2ot >ange Cari!2ot 3i!e letter !ate! 2<.3.1=== !irecte! SSP 'athin!a for registration of CI> "$ sen!ing or!ers of ;onE"le ;igh Court !ate! =.4.1==? an! co/$ of enDuir$ re/ort of then Sessions Ju!ge 'athin!a. It was further !irecte! that the in3estigation "e entruste! to SP(D* 'athin!a. 5fter o"taining o/inion from DD5 (1egal* 'athin!a the SSP 'athin!a !irecte! S;) PS +otwali 'athin!a to register CI> an! to han! o3er the file to SP(D* 'athin!a for in3estigation. 5s such the in3estigation was con!ucte! "$ then SP (D* 'athin!a Sh.;ar!ee/ Singh from 31.3.1=== to :.=.1===. Statements of witnesses were recor!e!. S/ot was ins/ecte!. Visual site /lan was /re/are!. >ecor! was also /rocure! from Police 1ines 'athin!a. During the in3estigation com/lainant Gur!it Singh again a//roache! the ;onE"le ;igh Court 3i!e 7rit Petition &o.23<:2.6.== asserting that the /olice is not /resenting challan of the CI> got registere! "$ him. 8he ;onE"le ;igh Court !irecte! concerne! DIG 'athin!a to com/lete the in3estigation within four months.8he DIG Cari!2ot >ange Cari!2ot han!e! o3er further in3estigation to then SP(D* Cari!2ot un!er his su/er3ision. 5s such the further in3estigation was con!ucte! "$ SP(D* Cari!2ot from ?.=.1=== to ?.2.2000. 8hereafter on account of transfer of Sh.'al"ir Singh +haira then SP(D* Cari!2ot
<
further in3estigation was con!ucte! "$ Sh.;ar"hajan Singh SP(D* Cari!2ot. SP(D* ;ar"hajan Singh also recor!e! statements of some witnesses !uring the in3estigation. ,fforts were ma!e to search Paramjit Singh "$ /u"lication of notice in some &ews/a/ers with Photogra/h of Paramjit Singh "ut to no effect. 5ccuse! were arreste!.5fter com/letion of in3estigation the challan was /resente! against all the aforesai! accuse! for offence un!er Section 3<# 3:2 223 220 1=3 120.' IPC. 3* F/on /resentation of challan co/ies of the !ocuments as reDuire!
un!er Section 204 of the Co!e of Criminal Proce!ure were su//lie! to accuse! "$ the learne! IllaDa 6agistrate an! after hearing learne! 5sst.. PP for State an! learne! !efence counsel /rima facie offences un!er Section 3<# 3:2 223 120.' of IPC were foun! ma!e out against the accuse!. 5s such charge was frame! "$ then learne! Chief Ju!icial 6agistrate 'athin!a on 2:.#.2002. 5ll the accuse! /lea!e! not guilt$ an! claime! trial. Prosecution witnesses were or!ere! to "e summone!. :* 8he com/lainant /referre! re3ision /etition against the or!er !ate!
2:.#.2002 in the court of learne! 5!!itional Sessions Ju!ge 'athin!a which was acce/te! 3i!e or!er !ate! 23.4.200:. 8he 8rial Court (CJ6 'athin!a* was !irecte! to commit the case un!er Section 302 IPC. #* In com/liance with this or!er the case was committe! to the Court of
Sessions "$ then learne! Chief Ju!icial 6agistrate 'athin!a 3i!e commitment or!er !ate! 23.12.200: an! the case was recei3e! in this Court "$ entrustment. <* 5fter hearing learne! 5!!itional Pu"lic Prosecutor for the State
learne! !efence counsel /rima facie offence un!er Section 120.' 3<: 302 201 IPC were foun! ma!e out against the accuse!. Charge was accor!ingl$ frame! on 11.?.200# against all the a"o3e sai! accuse!. It was rea! o3er an! e-/laine! to the accuse!. 5ccuse! /lea!e! not guilt$ an! claime! trial. Prosecution was !irecte! to /ro!uce e3i!ence. 4* In or!er to connect the accuse! with the commission of offence
/rosecution e-amine! as man$ as 21 witnesses. Prosecution faile! to conclu!e e3i!ence !es/ite 3arious o//ortunities. 5s such e3i!ence of the /rosecution was close! "$ or!er !ate! 12.?.2013. Prosecution e3i!ence is summari@e! as un!erB. 1. P71 Gur!it Singh is the com/lainant of this case. ;e has
!e/ose! that on 14.4.1==2 he was /resent at his flour mill situate! in 'i"i 7ala Chow2. ;e left the flour mill for 5mmunition De/ot to atten! his !ut$. ;e reache! at 5mmunition De/ot at ?.20 am. In the meantime his son 'aljit Singh arri3e! there an! tol! him that /olice officials ha! arri3e! at flour mill in two /ri3ate cars without num"er /lates. 8he$ are in ci3il uniform an! ha3e starte! enDuiring Paramjit Singh an! ha3e ta2en awa$ Paramjit Singh on the e-cuse that search of his house situate! in Gali &o.13 is to "e con!ucte!. ;e an! 'aljit Singh firstl$ came to flour mill an! thereafter ha! gone on a scooter chasing cars. 8he$ reache! at their house from where it was learnt that /olice officials ha! not come there to con!uct search of the house. 8hen he an! his son 'aljit Singh 3isite! 5mmunition De/ot at Cantt. 5rea 'athin!a. ;e met +uljit Singh Secretar$ of the
,m/lo$ee Fnion of the De/ot an! !isclose! entire 3ersion to him. ;e an! +uljit Singh met the Comman!ant 6r.S.S.Passi who reDuire! him to gi3e in writing. ;e got a//lication scri"e! from +uljit Singh an! /ut signatures on the original as well as co/$ thereof. Co/$ was han!e! o3er to +uljit Singh an! original was su"mitte! "efore Comman!ant 6r.S.S.Passi. 8he Comman!ant ha! s/o2en to 5!ministrator 6r.'oro who accom/anie! him to the office of SSP 'athin!a "ut SSP was not a3aila"le. )n the same !a$ i.e. on 14.4.1==2 he accom/anie! "$ resi!ents of his 6ohalla came to the office of SSP "ut he was not /resent. ;e again a//roache! SSP 'athin!a "$ 5!ministrator 6r.'oro on 1? an! 1= Jul$ 1==2 "ut SSP was not a3aila"le on these two !a$s. )n 20.4.1==2 he accom/anie! "$ 6r.'oro met the SSP 'athin!a an! han!e! o3er a//lication which was earlier han!e! o3er to the Comman!ant "ut SSP assure! to sen! re/l$ in writing to Comman!ant an! sent re/l$ to Comman!ant 6r.S.S.Passi. 8he Comman!ant !isclose! him a"out the contents of their re/l$ wherein it was re3eale! that the /olice officials ha! "rought his son Paramjit Singh from the flour mill "ut he has a"scon!e! from their custo!$. 8hereafter no action was ta2en "$ SSP on his a//lication. 8hereafter he han!e! o3er one co/$ of the a//lication to ;onE"le 6r.Justice ;.S.'e!i in 1o2 5!alat 'athin!a. 5s !irecte! "$ ;onE"le 6r.Justice 'e!i he a//eare! "efore ;onE"le 6r. Justice 'e!i on 20.11.1==: an! ;onE"le 6r. Justice 'e!i mar2e!
enDuir$ to 1earne! Sessions Ju!ge 'athin!a. ;e has also got /ro3e! an! /ro!uce! a//lication ,-.P5 an! his a//lication !ate! 11.3.1=== mo3e! to SSP 'athin!a ,-.P'. 2. P72 'aljit Singh is son of com/lainant Gur!it Singh. ;e
has state! that on 14.4.1==2 at a"out ?.00 am his "rother Paramjit Singh was sitting at their flour mill at 'i"i 7ala Chow2 'athin!a. 8wo cars came there. <.4 /ersons in ci3il uniform alighte! from the car. Gurjeet Singh an! 5SI 'arjin!er +umar were amongst those /ersons as he was 2nowing them. ;is "rother Paramjit Singh was as2e! to accom/an$ them an! he was ma!e to sit in one car. ;e mo3e! alongwith his "rother "ut he was as2e! to remain /resent at the flour mill . 8hereafter he came to the house on his scooter an! on enDuir$ came to 2now that those /ersons ha3e not come to their house along with Paramjit Singh. ;e then a//roache! his father in the 5mmunition De/ot. In his further statement he has corro"orate! the 3ersion as !etaile! "$ his father Gur!it Singh (P71*. 3. P73 +uljit Singh has !e/ose! that he is em/lo$e! in
5mmunition De/ot from 1=4? onwar!s. In the $ear 1==2 he was General Secretar$ of Janta +aramchari Sangh 5mmunition De/ot an! Paramjit Singh was em/lo$e! as Cireman. 'aljit Singh an! Gur!it Singh were em/lo$e! as 6aj!oor. )n 14.4.1==2 at a"out =.00 am Gur!it Singh came to him in the 5mmunition De/ot an! !isclose! that Ins/ector Gurjeet Singh was in ci3il !ress an! has
10
ta2en his son Paramjit Singh who was sitting in his 5tta Cha22i situate! at 'i"i 7ala Chow2. ;e was ta2en on the /lea of search of his house "ut search was not con!ucte!. ;e along with Gur!it Singh met 6r.S.S. Passi Comman!ant of 5mmunition De/ot. In his further statement he has corro"orate! the 3ersion as alrea!$ re3eale! "$ com/lainant Gur!it Singh. :. P7: 6al Singh has !e/ose! that he is resi!ing in Dhani near
the canal. ;is house0Dhani is at a !istance of a"out 1 +6 from Jhum"a Canal 'ri!ge. 8he$ are resi!ing there for the last 2?.2= $ears. 8he Jhum"a canal "ri!ge is 3isi"le from his Dhani0house. ;is father was Granthi. 8he$ ha3e /lace! Sri Guru Granth Sahi" in their house. ;is father use! to recite Path of Sri Guru Granth Sahi". )n 14.4.1==2 there was 'hog of Path "eing recite! "$ his father. 8his 'hog ceremon$ was in the morning of 14th Jul$. ;is father ha! "een reciting the Path for whole of the night an! the entire famil$ was listening the Path an! remain awa2en. ;e !i! not hear an$thing on that night. 5"out 1# !a$s thereafter one 'aljit Singh came from 'athin!a an! enDuire! whether there was an$ /olice encounter at the "ri!ge an! he re/lie! that there was no /olice encounter on the "ri!ge of that night. 5fter 20.2# !a$s thereafter /olice ha! come to their house an! as2e! them to /ut signatures to the effect that there was attac2 on the /olice an! he shoul! sign in that regar!. ;e refuse! to /ut signatures as there was no /olice encounter. ;e has also state!
11
that !uring the enDuir$ con!ucte! "$ learne! Sessions Ju!ge 'athin!a his statement was recor!e!. #. P7# Gur!as Singh has come from the office of DIG 'athin!a.
;e has /ro3e! or!ers of DIG Sh.Gur"achan Singh 6ann on the "asis of which enDuir$ ,-.P7#05 was con!ucte! "$ Sh.+.S.Garewal then Sessions Ju!ge 'athin!a. ;e has /ro3e! signatures ,-.P7#0' of then DIG Cari!2ot. ;e has further !e/ose! that after o"taining legal o/inion the CI> was registere! against these accuse! /ersons. <. P7< Gurmail Singh has come from the office of SP(D*
'athin!a along with summone! recor!. ;e has /ro!uce! co/$ of re/ort &o.1: !ate! 14.4.1==2 (,-.P7<05* co/$ of >e/ort &o.4 !ate! 1?.4.1==2 (,-.P7<0'* co/$ of entries in >egister &o.1= (,-.P7<0C* co/$ of entr$ in register &o.1= (,-.P7<0D*. ;e has also !e/ose! that as /er P.). >egister Paramjit Singh son of Gur!it Singh was !eclare! /roclaime! offen!er on 14.11.1==2. Co/$ of this or!er is /ro!uce! as ,-.P7<0,. 4. P74 ;C Su2hjin!er Singh has "rought the summone! recor!
an! has !e/ose! that as /er recor! uniform was issue! to 8arlo2 Singh Consta"le &o.1#33 3i!e entr$ at /age &o.11=. Some new articles were also issue!. ;e has /ro!uce! co/$ of this register as ,-.P7405. ?. P7? ;C 'hagwant Singh has /ro!uce! on recor! co/$ of
recruitment or!er of 'arjin!er +umar (,-.P7?05* an! co/$ of or!er
12
of recruitment of ;arin!er Singh( ,-.P7?0'*. =. P7= C.Jatin!er Singh has /ro!uce! co/$ of recruitment or!er
of 1a2h"ir Singh (,-.P7=01*. 10. P710 ;ar"hajan Singh has !e/ose! that in the $ear 2000 he was /oste! as SP(D* Cari!2ot. In3estigation of this case was entruste! to him. During the in3estigation he has recor!e! statements of Jagmal Singh 'hun!er Singh ;C Gurtej Singh ;arjit Singh 'hagwant Singh Paramjit Singh Gill IPS S.S.Passi 5.+.Sharma ;arjas Singh FDC 6ajor 6.+.+han ;ari Chan! 5SI Su2h!e3 Singh ;C >achh/al Singh ;arman!er Singh &o.1?# +ul!ee/ >o$ Su/erinten!ent ;ome Gur"achan Singh ;C
Su2hjin!er Singh etc. ;e recor!e! statements of witnesses correctl$ an! after com/letion of in3estigation challan was /resente! "$ then S;) PS +otwali 'athin!a. 11. P711 >anjit Singh Ins/ector has !e/ose! that on ?.1.2001 he was /oste! as Sena Cler2 in the office of SSP 'athin!a. ;e han!e! o3er co/ies of recor! of Gur"achan Singh &o.:0< an! as /er recor! he was recruite! as Consta"le 3i!e or!er ,-.P71105. C.Pal Singh &o.11= was /oste! at 'alluana 3i!e /osting or!er ,-.P7110'. C.Gur"achan Singh was transferre! to PP 'alluana 3i!e or!er &o.21:= (,-.P7110C*. SI Gurjeet Singh was /oste! at PS Sa!ar 'athin!a 3i!e or!er !ate! 10.1.1==2 (,-.P7110D*. 5SI 'arjin!er +umar was transferre! from PP +angar to PS Sa!ar 'athin!a 3i!e
13
or!er ,-.P7110,. 1a2h"ir Singh 5SI was transferre! to PP 'alluana 3i!e or!er ,-.P7110C. C.;arin!er Singh was transferre! to PS Sa!ar 'athin!a 3i!e or!er ,-.P7110G. 8arlo2 Singh &o.1#33 was transferre! to PP 'alluana 3i!e or!er ,-.P7110;. 6al Singh Consta"le was recruite! 3i!e or!er ,-.P7110I an! transferre! to PP 'alluana 3i!e or!er ,-.P7110J. 12. P712 Gur!ee/ Singh has /ro!uce! the summone! recor! of P;G Jarnail Singh P;G Jagsir Singh an! /ro!uce! recruitment or!er ,-.P71205 an! ,-.P7120'. 13. P713 ;armeet Singh has /ro!uce! recruitment or!er of P;G +anwaljit Singh ,-.P71305 an! has !e/ose! that he was transferre! to 'athin!a 3i!e or!er !ate! 14.3.1=?#. 1:. P71: Gurtej Singh 5SI has /ro!uce! co/$ of CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2 CI> &o.#1 !ate! 1?.4.1==2 (,-.P71:05 an!
,-.P71:0'* res/ecti3el$. ;e has also /ro!uce! co/$ of !isclosure statement of Paramjit Singh ,-.P71:0C co/$ of Gimn$ ,-.P71:0D an! ,-.P71:0, co/$ of /ersonal search memo ,-.P71:0C co/$ of Gimn$ &o.13 ,-.P71:0G reco3er$ memo ,-.P71:0; memo of "loo! staine! earth ,-.P71:0I an! ,-.P71:0J co/$ of reco3er$ memo ,-.P71:0+ co/$ of statement of 8arlo2 Singh ,-.P71:01 co/$ of statement of >anjit Singh ,-.P71:06 co/$ of statement of Gurjant Singh ,-.P71:0& co/$ of statement of C.8arlo2 Singh ,-.P71:0) co/$ of reco3er$ memo of em/t$ cartri!ges
1:
,-.P71:0P co/$ of Gimnies ,-.P71:0%1 to ,-.P71:0%# co/$ of statement of 1a2h"ir Singh ,-.P71:0> co/$ of statement of 'arjin!er +umar ,-.P71:0S co/$ of Gimn$ &o.14 ,-.P71:08 co/$ of /ersonal search memo of Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh ,-.P71:0F co/$ of statement of ;C Gur"achan Singh ,-.P71:0V. 1#. P71# ;ar!ee/ Singh has !e/ose! that in the $ear 1=== he was /oste! as SP (D* 'athin!a an! in3estigation of this case was con!ucte! "$ him. ;e recor!e! statements of witnesses an! later on the in3estigation was transferre! to another I.). 1<. P71< 5nil +umar Sharma has !e/ose! that on 2:.4.1==2 he was /oste! as SSP 'athin!a. In res/onse to letter !ate! 20.4.1==2 from the office of 5!ministrator )ffice 5mmunition De/ot 'athin!a Cantt. he wrote letter ,-.P71<05 to 6.5.+han 5!ministrati3e )fficer Gola.. 'aroo! De/ot 5mmunition De/ot un!er his signatures an! his statement was also recor!e! in this regar!. 14. P714 Gurtej Singh 5SI has !e/ose! that on 11.01.2001 he was /oste! as 506;C PP 'alluana of PS Sa!ar 'athin!a. ;e has state! that co/ies of DD>s !ate! 1?.4.1==2 (,-.P71405* co/$ of DD> &).1= (,-.P7140'* co/$ of DD> &o.13 (,-.D7140C* co/$ of DD> &o.? (,-.P7140D* are /re/are! "$ him as /er original recor!. 1?. P71? Su2h!e3 Singh has !e/ose! that Paramjit Singh son of Gur!it Singh was his frien!. ;e was em/lo$e! in 5mmunition De/ot 'athin!a Cantt. )n 14.4.1==2 in the e3ening hours his
1#
sister(7itnessEs* was l$ing a!mitte! in hos/ital of Dr.>enu Garg 'athin!a "eing a !eli3er$ case. ;e went to his sister to su//l$ meals. In those !a$s he was /racticing as >6P Doctor in Street &o.2 5mar/ura 'asti 'athin!a. 5fter hos/ital of Dr.>enu Garg he was going to his clinic an! when he was /assing /olice station Sa!ar 'athin!a then 6;C of PS Sa!ar 'athin!a reDueste! him to e-amine one /erson who ha! "een se3erel$ interrogate! "$ the /olice an! has "ecome unconscious. )n reDuest of 506;C Su2h!e3 Singh he went insi!e PS Sa!ar 'athin!a. SI Gurjeet Singh 5SI 'arjin!er +umar along with some other /olice officials were /resent at Police Station. ;e e-amine! the sai! /erson an! foun! "loo! oo@ing from his nose an! mouth. 8he hea! hairs were untie! an! e$es were wi!e o/en an! still. 8he /ulse an! heart "eat were missing. ;e a!3ise! 6;C Su2h!e3 Singh to get him e-amine! from another !octor. 8he /erson was recogni@e! "$ him as Paramjit Singh who was /re3iousl$ 2nown to him. 6;C Su2h!e3 Singh a!3ise! him not to !isclose this fact to an$ "o!$ else otherwise he will face same fate. 8hereafter in the $ear 1==< Jogin!er Singh of 3illage 'ehniwal who was resi!ing in Street &o.2< 5jit >oa! 'athin!a met him an! !isclose! him that an enDuir$ is "eing con!ucte! regar!ing !eath case of Paramjit Singh. ;e !isclose! the fact of 14.4.1==2 to Jogin!er Singh. Jogin!er Singh along with father an! "rother of Paramjit Singh came to him an! reDueste! him to !e/ose as a witness as /er facts e-/laine! "$ him.
1<
8hereafter he a//eare! an! got recor!e! statement in enDuir$ con!ucte! "$ District H Sessions Ju!ge 'athin!a. 1=. P71= SS Passi has !e/ose! that in the $ear 1==2 he was /oste! as Comman!ant in 5mmunition De/ot 'athin!a Cantt. )n 14.4.1==2 +uljit Singh Store +ee/er 5mmunition De/ot 'athin!a an! Gur!it Singh la"ourer a//eare! "efore him in his office an! !isclose! that Paramjit Singh son of Gur!it Singh has "een /ic2e! u/ "$ the /olice an! he "e trace! out. ;e ma!e attem/t to contact SSP 'athin!a tele/honicall$ "ut SSP 'athin!a was not a3aila"le at 'athin!a. )n 20.4.1==2 Gur!it Singh /ro!uce! one a//lication "efore him. +uljit Singh Secretar$ 5mmunition De/ot 'athin!a scri"e! one letter on the letter /a! of Janta +aramchari Sangh regar!ing whis2ing awa$ of Paramjit Singh who was /oste! as fireman in their De/ot. ;e !irecte! 6ajor 6.5. +han of 5mmunition De/ot 'athin!a to write letter to SSP 'athin!a to trace out Paramjit Singh. ;e has also /ro3e! letter ,-.P71=05 written "$ 6ajor 6.5.+han an! his en!orsement ,-.P71=0'. ;e has also /ro3e! letter ,-.P71<05 written "$ SSP 'athin!a to 6ajor 6.5. +han in res/onse to letter ,-.P71=05 which was /ut u/ "efore him. 20. P7 20 Ins/ector Jogin!er Singh has "rought the character roll file of ;C Pal Singh an! has /lace! on recor! co/$ of or!er 'oo2 &o.:4=0' (,-.P72005*. 21. P721 SI >achh/al Singh has !e/ose! that on ?.1.2001 he was
14
/oste! as District Police )fficer in SSP )ffice Patiala an! su"mitte! co/$ of a//ointment letter of 8arlo2 Singh. 'elt &o.8.1#33 '8I was allotte! to him 3i!e office or!er !ate! 11.?.1=?=. ;e has also /ro!uce! co/$ of or!er "oo2 ,-.P72105 in this regar!. 22. 1earne! 5!!l. Pu"lic Prosecutor ten!ere! into e3i!ence
sanction or!er !ate! 12.2.2001 of Princi/al Secretar$ of Punja" Go3t. ;ome an! Justice 5ffairs (,-.PI*. ?* It is rele3ant to mention that !uring the trial accuse! 1a2h"ir Singh
an! Pal Singh were re/orte! !ea!. Procee!ings against them were a"ate! 3i!e or!er !ate! =.2.200< an! 21.1.2010 res/ecti3el$. 5ccuse! Gurjeet Singh a"sente! himself an! !i! not turn u/ !es/ite ser3ice through /roclamation. ;e was !eclare! /roclaime! offen!er 3i!e or!er 2:.3.200?. =* 5fter the close of /rosecution e3i!ence remaining accuse! were
e-amine! un!er Section 313 of Cr.PC in or!er to affor! them o//ortunit$ to e-/lain the incriminating circumstances a//earing against them in /rosecution e3i!ence. 5ccuse! !enie! the /rosecution 3ersion an! /lea!e! false im/lication. 5ccuse! 'arjin!er +umar further e-/laine! that CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2 un!er Section 30403: IPC an! Section 2# 5rms 5ct was registere! at PS Sa!ar 'athin!a against two un2nown /ersons for firing at /olice /art$ hea!e! "$ SI Gurcharan Singh CI5 Staff 'athin!a. )ut of those two /ersons one !ie! in cross firing an! one /erson ha! run awa$ from the s/ot who was nominate! as Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh 'a"ar son of Gur!it Singh resi!ent of Gali &o.13 Guru Go"in! Singh &agar 'athin!a on 1:.4.1==2. 5SI 1a2h"ir Singh
1?
then Incharge PP 'alluana arreste! Paramjit Singh J Dhanna 'a"ar on 14.04.=2 an! confine! him to /olice loc2 u/ at PP 'alluana. )n the same !a$ !uring the interrogation Paramjit Singh J Dhanna 'a"ar suffere! !isclosure statement to the effect that he has 2e/t conceale! one 5+ :4 rifle along with two maga@ine an! :0 cartri!ges in tractor tu"e an! tu"e ha! "een wra//e! in jute cloth an! that "ag has "een 2e/t in the !itches "$ !igging mu! mitti near "ri!ge of canal Peori in the area of 3illage Jhum"a 'hai2a. ;e ha! e-clusi3e 2nowle!ge a"out the same an! can get it reco3ere!. 8his !isclosure statement was recor!e! "$ SI Gurjeet Singh then S;) PS Sa!ar 'athin!a an! thum" mar2e! "$ Paramjit Singh J Dhanna 'a"ar an! atteste! "$ him an! 5SI 1a2h"ir Singh. In /ursuance to this !isclosure statement Paramjit Singh was "eing ta2en to the !isclose! /lace on 14.4.1==2 at a"out =.1# /m. 8he /olice /art$ was consisting of him SI Gurjeet Singh 5SI 1a2h"ir Singh ;C Gur"achan Singh C.II 6al Singh C. 8arlo2 Singh &o.1#33 C.;arin!er Singh &o.144: P;G +anwaljit Singh P;G Jarnail Singh SP) Jagsir Singh on a Go3t. Canter !ri3en "$ C.Pal Singh &o.11= an! were going from PP 'alluana. Paramjit Singh J Dhanna 'a"ar was in han!cuffe! an! its one en! was struc2 with "uc2le of C.8arlo2 Singh &o.1#33. 8he /olice /art$ was !ul$ arme! with ser3ice rifles an! wea/ons. 7hen the /olice /art$ reache! near "ri!ge of canal Peori in the area of 3illage Jhum"a 'hai2a it was 10.00 /m some un2nown /ersons fire! at the /olice /art$ to 2ill them from "ehin! the "ushes in the !itches. SI Gurjeet Singh or!ere! the /olice /art$ to fire in self !efence. Ciring went on from "oth si!es for a"out half an hour. 7hen firing sto//e! an! /olice
1=
/art$ turne! on search light it was foun! that Paramjit Singh ha! run awa$ in the !ar2ness un!er the co3er of firing with the han!cuff. SI Gurjeet Singh got recor!e! CI> &o.#1 !ate! 1?.4.1==2 un!er Section 304 22: 22# 1?<03: IPC 2# 5rms 5ct # an! < 85D5 5ct at PS Sa!ar 'athin!a. Crom the s/ot 2# em/t$ of 5+:4 fire! "$ un2nown assailants were reco3ere! an! ta2en to /olice /ossession. In3estigation was carrie! out "$ 3arious Senior Police )fficers an! su"seDuentl$ Paramjit Singh J Dhanna 'a"ar was !eclare! /roclaime! offen!er "$ the court. )ne Ghu!har Singh son of Gul@ar Singh resi!ent of 6ehraj ha! a//eare! "efore Sh.;ar"hajan Singh SP(D* Cari!2ot who was con!ucting in3estigation an! ha! state! that in the $ear 1==4 he ha! 3isite! Patna Sahi" Guru!wara at Patna ('ihar* an! ha! sta$e! there for a"out a wee2. During this time he met Paramjit Singh J Dhanna 'a"ar !oing Sewa in the Guru!wara Sahi". Paramjit Singh also enDuire! a"out his famil$ an! other affairs of the cit$ from him. 10* 5ll the other accuse! also !enie! the /rosecution 3ersion an! ha3e
a!o/te! the statement of co accuse! 'arjin!er +umar. 11* In !efence e3i!ence the accuse! e-amine! as man$ as si- witnesses
whose testimon$ is summari@e! as un!erB. 1. D71 Su2h!e3 Singh son of Gur"a- Singh has !e/ose! that on
21.=.1==2 he along with Sohan Singh son of 5ssa Singh ha! gone to ;a@oor Sahi" for /a$ing o"eisance. 7hen he was /resent at Guru!wara Sahi" Paramjit Singh son of Gur!it Singh met him an! enDuire! a"out his well "eing as he 2new him. 8he$ ha! tal2e! for a"out 1.102 hour. Paramjit
20
Singh was astonishe! as to how he recogni@e! him after so man$ $ears. Paramjit Singh also !isclose! that for man$ $ears he remaine! at Patna Sahi" an! !i! Sewa there. Since 200= he is !oing Sewa at ;a@oor Sahi". ;e has also !isclose! that he has /le!ge! to s/en! his remaining life in Guru!wara Sahi" "$ !oing Sewa. ;e reDueste! Paramjit Singh to accom/an$ him for 'athin!a "ut he refuse!. 5fter arri3ing at his 3illage he 3isite! Guru!wara %ila Sahi" at 'athin!a an! met Gur!it Singh father of Paramjit Singh. ;e tol! him that some !a$s /rior Paramjit Singh ha! met him at ;a@oor Sahi" "ut he state! that it is in his 2nowle!ge an! he (Gur!it Singh* /ai! no hee! to his tal2. 8hen he felt sus/icious an! tal2e! to res/ecta"les of his 3illage. 8hen he was tol! that Paramjit Singh has "een !eclare! /roclaime! offen!er an! is wante! "$ the /olice. ;e "eing ,-. 6em"er Pancha$at felt his !ut$ to inform the /olice an! went to Police Station Phul from where he was a!3ise! to go to PS Sa!ar 'athin!a as the case /ertain to that Police Station. ;e has also /ro!uce! original railwa$ tic2et ,-.D7105 !onation recei/t ,-.D710' his Photogra/h ta2en at ;a@oor Sahi" ,-.D710C an! signatures on a//lication ,-.D710D. 2. D72 Ghu!har Singh has !e/ose! that he is "a/ti@e! Si2h (5mrit
Dhari* since 1=?3. ;e is ,-. 6em"er Pancha$at of his 3illage an! is in the ha"it of 3isiting 3arious Guru!waras in In!ia to /a$ o"eisance. 5"out 1# $ears "ac2 he ha! 3isite! Patna Sahi" Guru!wara along with other /eo/le an! remaine! there for a"out one wee2. ;e met Paramjit Singh son of
21
Gur!it Singh an! ha! a tal2 with him for a"out one0half hour. ;e reDueste! him to accom/an$ them to 'athin!a "ut he (Paramjit Singh* state! that he will s/en! his remaining life in Guru!wara. )n the ne-t !a$ he again trie! to tal2 him an! enDuire! from local Sewa!ars a"out Paramjit Singh. ;e was tol! that Paramjit Singh use to a3oi! /ersons coming from 'athin!a. ;e ha! ol! acDuaintance with Paramjit Singh as he has "een meeting Paramjit Singh at 3arious occasions. 7hen he came "ac2 he tal2e! to 3arious /ersons regar!ing attitu!e of Paramjit Singh. 8hen it came to his 2nowle!ge that he has "een !eclare! /roclaime! offen!er "$ the 'athin!a /olice an! is wante! in 3arious criminal cases. ;e was a!3ise! to lo!ge com/laint with the /olice an! he went to PS Phul to lo!ge re/ort "ut /olice a!3ise! him to go to /olice station Sa!ar as the case /ertain to that /olice station. 8hen he went to PS Sa!ar 'athin!a an! informe! a"out /resence of Paramjit Singh at Patna Sahi". 7hen he met Paramjit Singh he was wearing white Chola an! white aroun! tur"an. ;e was also calle! "$ Sh.;ar"hajan Singh then SP(D* Cari!2ot on 2<.3.2000 where he suffere! statement. 3. D73 6al2it Singh has !e/ose! that 3illage Jhum"a 'hai2a is : +ms
from his 3illage. ;is agriculture fiel!s a"uts canal minor going to 3illage Jhum"a 'hai2a an! 3illage Chughe +alan. )n 14.4.1==2 he was irrigating his fiel!s. ;is terms starte! from ?.2# /m to 1.02 am. 5t a"out 10.00010.30 /m he hear! noise of firing for a"out 1#.20 minutes. 5fter 1#.20 minutes one /erson came to him who was ha3ing han!cuffe!0chain in his left arm
22
an! !isclose! his name as Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar an! tol! him that /olice was after him.. ;e reDueste! to ta2e him to Jhum"a.8eona /assage. ;e ha! seen his face with torch light. ;e followe! him(witness* through the fiel!s an! near "ri!ge of canal he saw two /ersons stan!ing un!er the tree. 8hose two /ersona aime! their rifles towar!s us. Paramjit Singh i!entifie! those two /ersons an! tol! him that the$ were his associates. 8he$ !irecte! him (witness* to return "ac2 an! threatene! if he tal2 to an$"o!$ he will ha3e to face the !ire conseDuences. #.< !a$s thereafter /olice of PS Sa!ar met him in the fiel!s an! on their Duestioning he !isclose! this e/iso!e to them. 8hereafter S.'al"ir Singh +haira then SP(D* Cari!2ot calle! him on 22.1.2000 an! !isclose! the same e/iso!e to him. ;is statement was recor!e!. :. D7: Ins/ector 6ohri 1al is Incharge P.). Staff 'athin!a. ;e has
!e/ose! that he was mar2e! a//lication &o.1<330P030.:.2013 from the office of 5DGP (Crime* Chan!igarh through SSP 'athin!a which is /ro3e! as ,-.D710D. 8hereafter he e-amine! Su2h!e3 Singh son of Gur"a- Singh. ;e o"taine! /ermission from Senior )fficers to go to ;a@oor Sahi" for 3erification of the a//lication. ;e also o"taine! railwa$ warrants (,-.D7:05*. ;e along with Su2hmail Singh ;ea! Consta"le left for ;a@oor Sahi" on 1?.=.2013 an! reache! there in the morning on 20.=.2013. ;e ha! ta2en Photogra/hs of Paramjit Singh an! enDuire! from Securit$ Incharge 'al"ir Singh an! Sewa!ar Gurmu2h Singh an! one Sewa!ar of 1angar namel$ 7asa2ha Singh. ;e also e-amine! 3arious
23
/ersons !oing Sewa. Crom his in3estigation it trans/ire! that Paramjit Singh was resi!ing there an! he was not seen for the last <.4 !a$s. ;e went to Police Station &a@ira"a! District &an!er an! recor!e! his arri3al re/ort (,-.D7:0'*. ;e was also su//lie! CI> &o.4: !ate! 1#.=.2013 (,-.D7:0C* regar!ing arrest of four terrorist. ;e has also /ro!uce! re/ort mar2 (,-.D7:0D* of DSP CID 'athin!a. #. D7# Su2h!e3 Singh son of 6ehar Singh has !e/ose! that on
14.4.1==2 he was /oste! as 6;C PS Sa!ar 'athin!a. )n that !a$ he !i! not call P7 Su2h!e3 Singh an! no /erson "$ the name of Paramjit Singh was !etaine! at PS Sa!ar 'athin!a. <. 5ccuse! 'arjin!er +umar has a//eare! as D7< in !efence e3i!ence.
;e has !e/ose! that on 14.4.1==2 he was /oste! as 5SI at PS Sa!ar 'athin!a. ;e along with SI0S;) Gurjeet Singh an! other /olice officials namel$ P;G +anwaljit Singh C.;arjin!er Singh Dri3er Jag!e3 Singh were going on official Canter. &o.P'.03.31=2 for /atrolling in the area falling in PS Sa!ar an! PP 'alluana an! reache! at PP 'alluana. SI Gurjeet Singh ins/ecte! PP 'alluana. 5SI 1a2h"ir Singh was Incharge of PP 'alluana. 5SI 1a2h"ir Singh !isclose! to SI Gurjeet Singh that Paramjit Singh son of Gur!it Singh has "een arreste! in CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2 an! Paramjit Singh was /ro!uce! "efore SI Gurjeet Singh. SI Gurjeet Singh interrogate! Paramjit Singh in his /resence an! in /resence of 5SI 1a2h"ir Singh. During the interrogation accuse! Paramjit Singh suffere! !isclosure statement to the effect that he has 2e/t conceale! one 5+ :4
2:
rifle along with two maga@ine an! :0 cartri!ges wra//e! in a tractor tu"e after /utting in a Gatta 8at &$lon an! has conceale! in the area of Jhum"a 'hai2a in the !itches on the roa! going to Peori an! after !igging mu!. . ;is !isclosure statement (,-.P71:0C* was scri"e! which was thum" mar2e! "$ Paramjit Singh an! signe! "$ him an! 5SI 1a2h"ir Singh. 8hereafter accuse! Paramjit Singh was han!cuffe! an! the en! of chain of han!cuff was /ut in the "elt of C.8arlo2 Singh. Police /art$ along with SI Gurjeet Singh an! himself were going to the !isclose! /lace along with Paramjit Singh. 8he officials of PP 'alluana were also associate!. 5ll the /olice officials were !ul$ arme! with Go3t. wea/ons. 8he /olice /art$ was on the official Canter of PP 'alluana "earing &).P'.03.31<4. 7hen the /olice /art$ reache! near "ri!ge of Peori of Jhum"a canal some un2nown assailants ha! lai! an am"ush in the surroun!ing !itches. 8he$ starte! firing towar!s the /olice /art$ in or!er to 2ill. )n the !irections of SI Gurjeet Singh /olice /art$ also jum/e! from the canter an! too2 /osition an! starte! firing in self !efence. 8he firing went on for a"out 20.2# minutes from "oth si!es. 7hen the firing sto//e! /olice /art$ notice! that Paramjit Singh ha! esca/e! along with han!cuff "$ ta2ing "enefit of !ar2ness. 8hen with the hel/ of search light the area was searche! "ut Paramjit Singh was not foun!. )n further search 1# em/ties of 5+ :4 10 em/ties of 5+:4 were reco3ere! from another /oint which were fire! "$ assailants. 8hese were ta2en into /olice /ossession 3i!e reco3er$ memo ,-.P71:0P which was signe! "$ him an! 5SI 1a2h"ir Singh. SI Gurjeet
2#
Singh sent ruDa through C.;arin!er Singh an! P;G +anwaljit Singh to PS Sa!ar 'athin!a on the "asis of which formal CI> &o.#1 !ate! 1?.4.1==2 un!er Section 304032: IPC an! Section 2# of 5rms 5ct an! 85D5 5ct was registere! at PS Sa!ar 'athin!a which is ,-.P71:0'. Paramjit Singh was searche! in 3arious hamlets an! other /laces "ut he coul! not "e trace!. ;is statement was also recor!e! "$ SI Gurjeet Singh. 12* I ha3e gone through recor! of the case an! hear! arguments
a!3ance! "$ learne! 5!!itional Pu"lic Prosecutor for the State assiste! "$ 6r.G.S.Si!hu 5!3ocate counsel for the com/lainant as well as learne! !efence counsel. 13* It is su"mitte! "$ learne! 5!!l. Pu"lic Prosecutor assiste! "$
6r.G.S. Si!hu 5!3ocate that facts of the case are e-traor!inar$ an! in such a case court has to inno3ate the law an! court can also /ass uncon3entional or!er 2ee/ing in min! that e-traor!inar$ facts situation reDuire! e-traor!inar$ measures. 8he case of the /rosecution is that on 14.4.1==2 Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar was /ic2e! u/ "$ the /olice /art$ in ci3il !ress on the /rete-t that search of his house is to "e con!ucte!. P72 'aljit Singh is real "rother of Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar. ;e was /resent at 5tta Cha22i when Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar was lifte! "$ the /olice /art$ in ci3il !ress. ;e imme!iatel$ informe! his father Gur!it Singh (Com/lainant* when he came to 2now that the /olice /art$ has not come in their house for search /ur/oses. 8he matter was also re/orte! to SS Passi "$ accom/an$ing P73 +uljit Singh. 8herefore it is /ro3e! that Paramjit Singh was /ic2e! u/ "$ the /olice /art$ on 14.4.1==2 from 5tta Cha22i. 8he
2<
accuse! ha3e also not !enie! ha3ing arreste! Paramjit Singh on 14.4.1==2. 8herefore when it is /ro3e! that Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar was in /olice custo!$ on 14.4.1==2 the /olice was to e-/lain his wherea"outs. 5ccuse! ha3e trie! to sa3e themsel3es "$ /lea!ing that Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar was arreste! in case CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2 an! Paramjit Singh was name! as accuse! in this CI>. During the interrogation he suffere! !isclosure statement regar!ing concealment of 5+:4 rifle an! ammunition. 8his !isclosure statement was thum" mar2e! "$ Paramjit Singh an! in /ursuance to !isclosure statement the /olice /art$ was going to get reco3er$ effecte! from Paramjit Singh. )n the wa$ two uni!entifie! /ersons o/ene! fire! towar!s the /olice /art$. Police /art$ also too2 /osition an! o/ene! fire in self !efence. 8here was e-change of fire for a"out 1#.20 minutes. 5fter sto//ing of firing it was notice! that Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar has esca/e! un!er the co3er of !ar2ness. 5ccuse! 'arjin!er +umar Sharma has a//eare! in !efence witness as D7<. ;e has also ta2en this /lea !uring the e-amination un!er Section 313 Cr.PC. 8his /lea was a!o/te! "$ all the accuse! also. In this manner all the accuse! ha3e a!mitte! that Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar was in their custo!$ on 14.4.1==2.It is to "e seen whether the 3ersion of the accuse! that Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar was "eing ta2en for effecting reco3er$ of 5+ :4 an! ammunition is "elie3aa"le or not. P71: Gurtej Singh has "rought on recor! all the material !ocuments. 8here is no cross e-amination to this witness !es/ite o//ortunit$ gi3en to the accuse!. It is to "e /resume! that the genuineness of the !ocument /ro3e! "$ P71: Gurtej Singh is not !is/ute! "$ the accuse!. CI> &o.2? is on the recor! as ,-.P71:05. 8his
24
CI> is for offence un!er Section 30403: IPC an! 2# 5rms 5ct. 8his CI> is "ase! on ruDa sent "$ SI Gurcharan Singh of CI5 Staff 'athin!a. 8he allegations were that two un2nown /ersons o/ene! fire towar!s /olice /art$ with the intention to 2ill them. Police /art$ also re/lie! "$ firing in self !efence. Ciring too2 /lace for a"out 1#.20 minutes an! after sto//age of firing it was notice! with the search light that one $oung man of the age of 20.21 $ears was foun! !ea!. ;e was ha3ing one .31# "ore gun an! the other /erson has manage! to esca/e. 8here is nothing to show that an$ /olice official was injure! in this e-change of firing. 5s /er !efence 3ersion Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar was name! in this CI> su"seDuentl$. 5s such he was arreste! on 14.4.1==2. 8he CI> &o.#1 is /ro3e! as ,-.P71:0'. 8his CI> is "ase! on ruDa sent "$ SI Gurjeet Singh then S;) PS Sa!ar 'athin!a. It is re3eale! in this CI> that the /olice /art$ was consisting of SI Gurjeet Singh 5SI 'arjin!er +umar 5SI 1a2h"ir Singh ;C Gur"achan Singh C.II 6al Singh C. 8arlo2 Singh C.;arin!er Singh P;G +anwaljit Singh P;G Jarnail Singh P;G Jagsir Singh an! C.Pal Singh (!ri3er*. 8herefore this !ocument /ro3es /resence of all the accuse! when Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar was arreste! an! allege!l$ was "eing ta2en to canal "ri!ge in the area of 3illage Jhum"a for effecting reco3er$. 8his !ocument /ro3es custo!$ of Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar in all the accuse!. ,-.P71:0C is !isclosure statement. 5s /er this !ocument accuse! Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar suffere! !isclosure statement a!mitting concealment of 5+:4 rifle two maga@ine :0 cartri!ges 2e/t conceale! in the area of Jhum"a 'hai2a. 8he !isclosure statement is sus/icious !ocument. It is thum" mar2e! "$ Paramjit
2?
Singh. Paramjit Singh was em/lo$e!. ;e was e!ucate! /erson. ;e was ha3ing no reason to thum" mar2 the !ocument. It is case of the accuse! that Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar was "eing ta2en to effect reco3er$. 7hen the !isclosure statement is sus/icious !ocument the 3ersion of going for reco3er$ also "ecomes im/ro"a"le an! un"elie3a"le. ,3en otherwise if it is acce/te! that Paramjit Singh J 'a"ar suffere! !isclosure statement an! /olice /art$ was to effect reco3er$ there was no emergenc$ for the /olice /art$ to mo3e for effecting reco3er$ at such o!! hours (after =.00 /m* /articularl$ when the con!itions in Punja" were 8errorist effecte!. ,3en otherwise when the accuse! ha! alrea!$ gi3en /articulars of the /lace where the wea/ons were allegaa!l$ conceale! these coul! ha3e "een got reco3ere! at the le3el of /olice /art$ alone. 1:* It is further su"mitte! "$ learne! 5!!l. Pu"lic Prosecutor that the
stor$ of am"ush u/on /olice /art$ is also highl$ unnatural an! un"elie3a"le. 8he /olice /art$ was not going for reco3er$ in a /re /lanne! manner. 5SI 'arjin!er +umar has state! as D7< that he along with S;) Gurjeet Singh after ha3ing roun! in the area reache! PP 'alluana. It was 2nown that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna has "een arreste! an! on interrogation he suffere! !isclosure statement. 8he /olice /art$ /rocee!e! for effecting reco3er$. 8his 3ersion of 5SI 'arjin!er +umar shows that /olice /art$ has mo3e! towar!s the /lace /er chance. &o"o!$ was aware a"out the mo3ement of the /olice /art$. 8herefore there was no /ur/ose for an$"o!$ to attac2 the /olice /art$ with the /ur/ose to get Paramjit Singh J Dhanna release! from the /olice custo!$. >eco3er$
2=
memo ,-.P71:0P shows reco3er$ of 1# K 10 s/ent cartri!ges from the near"$ fiel!s which were allege!l$ fire! "$ the assailants. 8herefore as /er accuse! /olice /art$ was attac2e! "$ firing 2# shots from 5+ :4 "ut none was injure! from the /olice si!e. 8his fact shows the 3ersion of attac2 on the /olice /art$ as im/ro"a"le an! un"elie3a"le. 1#* It is also 3ersion of the accuse! that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna was
han!cuffe! an! he was in the custo!$ of C.8arlo2 Singh 5fter sto//ing of firing it was notice! that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna has esca/e! un!er the co3er of !ar2. It is also highl$ im/ro"a"le that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna woul! ha3e "een a"le to esca/e when there was firing from "oth the si!es. It is also not the 3ersion of the accuse! that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna esca/e! after sto//ing of firing. 8here was no sco/e for Paramjit Singh J Dhanna to esca/e e3en after sto//ing of firing as the entire /olice /art$ (/resent accuse!* were a!mitte!l$ arme! with wea/ons. 8herefore the 3ersion of the accuse! that Paramjit Singh esca/e! un!er the co3er of !ar2 is also not "elie3a"le. 7hen it is a!mitte! an! /ro3e! that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna was in the custo!$ of accuse! the accuse! were to e-/lain wherea"outs of Paramjit Singh. 'ut accuse! ha3e faile! to e-/lain wherea"outs of Paramjit Singh. 8his occurrence is of the $ear 1==2. Paramjit Singh J Dhanna was not seen "$ an$"o!$ !uring this /erio!. 5s such he is /resume! to "e !ea!. In these circumstances the reco3er$ of !ea! "o!$ is not material. 8he accuse! cannot esca/e from legal conseDuences onl$ for the reason that !ea! "o!$ is not reco3ere! or /ostmortem e-amination is not con!ucte!.
30
1<*
It is further su"mitte! "$ learne! 5!!l. Pu"lic Prosecutor that the
accuse! ha3e trie! to show that Paramjit Singh is still ali3e an! is sta$ing at Patna0;a@oor Sahi". 8his !efence 3ersion is again mislea!ing an! onl$ with the moti3e to esca/e from legal lia"ilit$. 5ccuse! ha3e e-amine! D71 Su2h!e3 Singh an! D72 Ghu!har Singh to /ro3e that Paramjit Singh was notice! "$ them at ;a@oor Sahi" an! Patna Sahi" Guru!waras. D71 Su2h!e3 Singh has claime! that he has seen Paramjit Singh on 21.=.2012 at ;a@oor Sahi". 8here is nothing to show that Su2h!e3 Singh was ha3ing an$ frien!shi/ or familiarit$ with Paramjit Singh. 8here is nothing to show that Paramjit Singh was ha3ing s/ecial feature to facilitate his i!entit$ after such a long /erio!. ;ow Su2h!e3 Singh i!entifie! Paramjit Singh who is not hear! for the last more than 20 $ears is also not e-/laine!. 8his witness has further state! that he went to Police Station Phul an! then Police Station Sa!ar 'athin!a just to intimate the /olice. 8his fact further shows that wh$ Su2h!e3 Singh was so an-ious to re/ort meeting Paramjit Singh to Police Station Phul an! then to PS Sa!ar 'athin!a. Similarl$ there is nothing to show that D72 Ghu!har Singh was ha3ing an$ frien!shi/ or relation with Paramjit Singh. ;ow he was 2nown to Paramjit Singh an! how he i!entifie! Paramjit Singh at Patna Sahi" 1# $ears "ac2. D72 Ghu!har Singh has a!mitte! in cross e-amination that he ha! a//eare! as witness in ju!icial enDuir$. ;e has a!mitte! a//lication ,-.PC an! affi!a3it ,-.PD mo3e! "$ him. ;e has a!mitte! affi!a3it 6ar2 L3. 5lthough he has !enie! from contents of the affi!a3it !ate! 14.:.2001 "ut he has a!mitte! that his affi!a3it was atteste! "$ Sh.>ajin!er 6a22ar 5!3ocate. )f course he has
31
state! that his affi!a3it was o"taine! un!er /ressure "$ Gur!it Singh. 'ut there is nothing to show that how he was un!er /ressure of Gur!it Singh. In a//lication ,-.PC this witness has a!mitte! that his statement shown "$ /olice in CI> &o.40 is totall$ incorrect. ;e ha! ne3er met Paramjit Singh an! he !i! not 2now Paramjit Singh. Similarl$ in affi!a3it ,-. PD he has recor!e! that his statement shown in CI> &o.40 !ate! 24.3.1=== is totall$ incorrect. ;e ha! ne3er gone to Patna Sahi" an! he ha! ne3er 2nown Paramjit Singh son of Gur!it Singh an! ne3er met him. 8herefore Ghu!har Singh has alrea!$ a!mitte! that he !o not 2now Paramjit Singh an! he ha! ne3er met Paramjit Singh at Patna Sahi". In these circumstances statement of D71 Su2h!e3 Singh an! D72 Ghu!har Singh are not hel/ful to /ro3e that Paramjit Singh is still ali3e. Statement of D7: Ins/ector 6ohri 1al also !oes not /ro3e that Paramjit Singh is ali3e. ;e has state! that he ha! gone to ;a@oor Sahi" on 1?.=.2013 along with Su2hmail Singh ;C to /rocure arrest of Paramjit Singh who was /roclaime! offen!er. 'ut in his cross e-amination he has a!mitte! that he !o not 2now Paramjit Singh /ersonall$. ;e ha! ta2en the /hotogra/h of Paramjit Singh which was in their file an! which was ta2en 2#.30 $ears "ac2. 8herefore how Ins/ector 6ohri 1al an! Su2hmail Singh were a"le to i!entif$ Paramjit Singh is not e-/laine!. In these circumstances the statement of D7: Ins/ector 6ohri 1al is onl$ to sa3e the accuse! from the net of criminal lia"ilit$ "eing /olice officials. 14* Continuing his arguments it is further su"mitte! "$ learne! 5!!l.
Pu"lic Prosecutor that if Paramjit Singh was ali3e he was ha3ing no reason to
32
a3oi! from coming to his famil$. ;e was marrie! an! ha3ing two chil!ren. ;e was not in3ol3e! in an$ serious case. CI> &o.2? is onl$ for offence un!er Section 304 IPC. Paramjit Singh is not name! as accuse! in this case. &o injur$ was recei3e! "$ an$ /olice officer0official in this allege! occurrence. 8herefore Paramjit Singh was ha3ing no reason to left his house an! ignore his famil$ onl$ for the reason that one CI> &o.2? was registere! against him or he was wante! in case CI> &o.2?. 5ll these facts sufficientl$ shows that accuse! ha3e /ut forth a fictitious 3ersion to show Paramjit Singh as ali3e. 1?* 1earne! 5!!l. Pu"lic Prosecutor has further su"mitte! that as /er
!irections of ;onE"le ;igh Court the enDuir$ was got con!ucte! from then District H Sessions Ju!ge 'athin!a Sh.+.S.Garewal. InDuir$ >e/ort is on the file as ,-.P7#05. In this inDuir$ re/ort it was conclu!e! that the 3ersion of com/lainant Gur!it Singh is su"stantiall$ correct while the /olice 3ersion is totall$ false. During the enDuir$ the /olice 3ersion was that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna has esca/e! when he was "eing ta2en for reco3er$ of wea/ons in /ursuance to his !isclosure statement suffere! "efore SI Gurjeet Singh. 8herefore the !efence 3ersion was alrea!$ !is"elie3e! !uring ju!icial enDuir$. ,3en if ju!icial enDuir$ is not acce/te! as conclusi3e /roof the fin!ings of this re/ort are also rele3ant an! are to "e ta2en into consi!eration. Crom all angles it is /ro3e! that Paramjit Singh was /ic2e! u/ "$ the /olice on 14.4.1==2 on the /rete-t of search of his house. 8hereafter he has not "een seen "$ an$"o!$. 8he inference is that he has "een eliminate! "$ the accuse! who were mem"ers of the /olice /art$ an! Paramjit Singh has "een eliminate! "$ hatching a criminal
33
cons/irac$. 8herefore the offence un!er Section 302 3<: 201 rea! with Section 120.' IPC stan! /ro3e! against all the accuse!. 8he accuse! "e con3icte! an! sentence! suita"l$. 8o su//ort these su"missions learne! 5!!l. Pu"lic Prosecutor has cite! case law Prithi6al Singh 7t&. 8ersus State of Pun4a2 and another et&. 20119(: !C! 9Crl.: Page $,1 9SC: to su"mit that if a"!uction is /ro3e! "ur!en shifts on accuse! to e-/lain as to what ha//ene! to 3ictim an! in case of non e-/lanation accuse! will "e hel! res/onsi"le for a"!uction illegal !etention an! mur!er. Mani /u1ar "ha6a 8ersus State of Si;;i1 20029*: !C! 9Crl.: Page $, 9SC: wherein it was o"ser3e! that in a trial for mur!er it is neither an a"solute necessit$ nor an essential ingre!ient to esta"lish cor/us !elicit. 1=* 8o ti!e o3er these su"missions learne! !efence counsel has
3ehementl$ su"mitte! that /rosecution is !ut$ "oun! to /ro3e its case "$ affirmati3e e3i!ence. Con3iction is not to "e "ase! on conjectures an! surmises. 5lthough !uring the enDuir$ "$ then Distt.an! Sessions Ju!ge 3ersion of the accuse! was not acce/te! true "ut it was not a ju!icial enDuir$ it was onl$ fact fin!ing enDuir$. 8he case of the /rosecution cannot "e hel! /ro3e! onl$ on the "asis of enDuir$ re/ort an! accuse! cannot "e con3icte! on the "asis of enDuir$ re/ort. 6oreo3er no or!er for registration of CI> was /asse! on the "asis of enDuir$ re/ort. 8he matter was enDuire! "$ senior )fficers of !e/artment an! C.8arlo2 Singh was foun! guilt$ for offence un!er Section 223 IPC as Paramjit Singh esca/e! from his custo!$. 20* It is further su"mitte! "$ learne! !efence counsel that although
3:
/rosecution has e-amine! as man$ as 21 witnesses "ut none of them is witness to allege! mur!er or 2i!na//ing of Paramjit Singh. )f course 'aljit Singh (P72* has state! that Paramjit Singh was /ic2e! u/ "$ the /olice /art$ in his /resence from 5tta Cha22i "ut the !ocuments relie! u/on "$ the /rosecution itself /ro3e that Paramjit Singh was not illegall$ /ic2e! u/. ;e was arreste! in case CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2. 8he accuse! ha3e /erforme! their legal !ut$ in the !ischarge of their official !ut$. 5s such "$ arrest of Paramjit Singh J Dhanna in case CI> &o.2? of 2<.3.1==2 no offence un!er Section 3<: IPC is ma!e out against the accuse!. P71 Gur!it Singh is the com/lainant of this case "ut he is not an e$e witness to an$ of the occurrence of 2i!na//ing or mur!er. P73 +uljit Singh has "een e-amine! onl$ to /ro3e that on the "asis of information recei3e! from Gur!it Singh he along with Gur!it Singh intimate! Sh.S.S.Passi Comman!ant of 5mmunition De/ot. 8herefore from the testimon$ of this witness also it is /ro3e! that Paramjit Singh was arreste! "$ the /olice /art$. P7: 6al Singh has "een e-amine! to /ro3e that on the inter3ening night of 14.4.1==2 he ha! not hear! an$ soun! of firing. ;e was confronte! with his statement ,-.D, from which it is /ro3e! that he has ma!e material im/ro3ements. ,3en otherwise no authenticit$ can "e attache! to the testimon$ of this witness. ;e was not ha3ing an$ recor! to /ro3e that there was recital of Sri 52han! Path in his house on 14.4.1==2. P7# Gur!as Singh has /ro3e! the formal or!er /asse! "$ DIG for con!ucting enDuir$. P7< ;C Gurmail Singh has also /ro!uce! recor!. 8his recor! is not going to /ro3e an$ offence "$ the accuse!. >e/ort &o.1: (,-.P7<05* sim/l$ /ro3e !e/arture of /olice /art$ of
3#
Gurjeet Singh on 14.4.1==2. >e/ort ,-.P7<0' /ro3es encounter with the /olice /art$ of SI Gurjeet Singh wherein 1# cartri!ges were use! "$ 5SI 'arjin!er +umar an! 14 cartri!ges were use! "$ SI Gurjeet Singh. 1: cartri!ges were use! "$ C.;arin!er Singh. 12 cartri!ges were use! "$ +anwaljit Singh. Co/$ of >egister &o.1= (,-.P7<0C an! ,-.P7<0D* further /ro3e reco3er$ of s/ent cartri!ges from the /lace of encounter. 8herefore the !ocuments /ro!uce! "$ P7< Gurmail Singh rather corro"orate the !efence 3ersion. P74 ;C Su2hjin!er Singh has /ro3e! that some new articles were issue! to C.8arlo2 Singh. 8his !ocument also corro"orates the !efence 3ersion that Paramjit Singh was in han!cuff an! in the custo!$ of C.8arlo2 Singh. P7? ;C 'hagwant Singh an! P7= C.Jatin!er Singh ha3e /ro3e! the recruitment or!ers of some of the accuse!. 8his e3i!ence is not going to /ro3e an$ charge against the accuse!. P710 ;ar"hajan Singh has sim/l$ !e/ose! that he recor!e! statements of some witnesses mentione! "$ him in his statement. P711 >anjit Singh is formal witness. ;e has also /ro3e! recruitment an! /osting of other accuse! at PS Sa!ar 'athin!a an! P712 Gur!ee/ Singh has /ro3e! recruitment of Jarnail Singh Jagsir Singh. P713 ;armeet Singh has /ro3e! recruitment of +anwaljit Singh. 8he statements of these witnesses are also not going to /ro3e main charge. P71: Gurtej Singh has /ro3e! co/$ of CI> &o.2? co/$ of CI> &o.#1 co/$ of !isclosure statement an! Gimnies. 8hese !ocuments !oes not /ro3e case of the /rosecution rather /ro3es the !efence 3ersion. P71# ;ar!ee/ Singh is formal witness. ;e has recor!e! statements of some witnesses. P71< 5nil +umar Sharma is also formal witness. ;e has sim/l$ /ro3e! letter recei3e!
3<
from 5!ministrati3e )fficer 5mmunition De/ot an! re/l$ to this letter. In his cross e-amination he has a!mitte! that Paramjit Singh was "eing ta2en for reco3er$ of wea/ons in /ursuance to his !isclosure statement an! on the wa$ /olice /art$ am"ushe! an! in cross firing Paramjit Singh manage! to esca/e. 8his witness has also corro"orate! the !efence 3ersion. P714 Gurtej Singh has also /ro3e! onl$ co/ies of DD>s. 8hese !ocuments also corro"orate the !efence 3ersion. P71? Su2h!e3 Singh was e-amine! to /ro3e that on 14.4.1==2 he e-amine! Paramjit Singh at Police Station Sa!ar 'athin!a. ;is /ulse an! heart "eat was missing. Su2h!e3 Singh(D7#* was 6;C on 14.4.1==2. ;e has entirel$ contra!icte! the 3ersion of P71? Su2h!e3 Singh. 6oreo3er the statement of P71? Su2h!e3 Singh is highl$ im/ro"a"le an! un"elie3a"le. In his e-amination.in.chief he has no where a!mitte! that Paramjit Singh is his relati3e. 'ut from his statement an! cross e-amination inference can "e !rawn that he is closel$ relate! to famil$ of com/lainant Gur!it Singh. 6oreo3er in case he has seen Paramjit Singh in /olice custo!$ on 14.4.1==2 he was to re3eal this fact at the earliest to Gur!it Singh or other famil$ mem"ers of Paramjit Singh. 5s such his statement is not hel/ful. P71= S.S.Passi is formal witness. ;e has onl$ /ro3e! that on 14.4.1==2 +uljit Singh an! Gur!it Singh !isclose! that Paramjit Singh has "een /ic2e! u/ "$ the /olice. 8he !efence 3ersion is that Paramjit Singh was arreste! in case CI> &o.2?. +ee/ing in 3iew the !efence 3ersion the statement of P71= SS Passi also /ales into insignificance. P720 Ins/ector Jogin!er Singh has also /ro3e! onl$ joining of accuse! Pal Singh an! P721 >achh/al Singh has /ro3e! a//ointment letter of 8arlo2 Singh.
34
8herefore the statement of witnesses other than P72 'aljit Singh are of formal nature. Crom the statement of P72 'aljit Singh also no offence is ma!e out as the !efence 3ersion is that Paramjit Singh was wante! in case CI> &o.2? an! he was arreste! in that case. 8he !ocumentar$ e3i!ence /ro!uce! "$ the /rosecution has also esta"lishe! that Paramjit Singh was legall$ arreste! in case CI> &o.2? of 2<.3.1==2. 8herefore the offence un!er Section 3<: IPC is not ma!e out. 21* It is further su"mitte! "$ learne! !efence counsel that in or!er to
"ring home the guilt of offence un!er Section 302 IPC the /rosecution is reDuire! to /ro3e that Paramjit Singh has "een mur!ere! or he has !ie!. 'ut there is no e3i!ence regar!ing !eath of Paramjit Singh. 8here is no e$e witness regar!ing mur!er of Paramjit Singh. Dea! "o!$ of Paramjit Singh is not reco3ere!. 5s such no /ostmortem e-amination was con!ucte!. 8here is no e3i!ence that the !ea! "o!$ of Paramjit Singh has "een !estro$e!. In these circumstances the offence un!er Section 302 IPC is not /ro3e!.7hen the offence u0s 302 IPC is not /ro3e! the offence u0s 201 IPC also can not "e hel! /ro3e!. 8he accuse! were ha3ing no moti3e to eliminate Paramjit Singh. 8here is nothing on recor! to show that Paramjit Singh was ha3ing an$ enmit$ against the accuse! or the accuse! were ha3ing an$ hostilit$ against Paramjit Singh. 22* It is also su"mitte! "$ learne! !efence counsel that D71 Su2h!e3
Singh D72 Ghu!har Singh ha3e rather /ro3e! that Paramjit Singh is still ali3e. 8he$ are the /ersons who ha3e seen Paramjit Singh at Patna Sahi" an! ;a@oor Sahi". In these circumstances the offence un!er Section 302 IPC is not ma!e
3?
out. 23* Continuing his argument it is further su"mitte! "$ learne! !efence
counsel that in case Paramjit Singh was a"!ucte! or eliminate! the com/lainant was to ma2e re/ort imme!iatel$. )f course com/lainant has a//roache! the ;onE"le ;igh Court "$ mo3ing com/laint !ate! 2=.10.1==: to ;onE"le 6r.Justice ;.S.'e!i "ut original a//lication is not /ro3e!. )nl$ translation is /ro3e!. 6oreo3er in this a//lication the com/lainant has allege! that some uni!entifie! /ersons as2e! his son to accom/an$ them as the$ were to search his house an! those uni!entifie! /ersons too2 him to un2nown /lace. 8he com/lainant has no where mentione! the name of an$ of the accuse!. Com/lainant has also not claime! /resence at the time of ta2ing his son "$ those /ersons. 8he case of the /rosecution mainl$ rest on the statements of
com/lainant Gur!it Singh (P71* an! his son 'aljit Singh (P72*. 'ut the$ are contra!ictor$ in their 3ersion. Com/lainant Gur!it Singh has state! in his e-amination.in.chief that he ha! left the flour mill for 5mmunition De/ot to atten! his !ut$ an! thereafter his son 'aljit Singh tol! him that /olice officials ha3e ta2en awa$ Paramjit Singh un!er the e-cuse that search of his house is to "e con!ucte!. It is further state! "$ this witness that he an! 'aljit Singh firstl$ came to flour mill an! thereafter ha! gone on a scooter chasing the car an! then the$ reache! at their house from where it was learnt that /olice officials ha3e not come there to con!uct the search. 8hen he an! his son 'aljit Singh 3isite! 5mmunition De/ot an! met +uljit Singh. In this wa$ as /er com/lainant Gur!it Singh firstl$ the$ "oth chase! the car an! then went to house to enDuire a"out
3=
Paramjit Singh. 8hereafter "oth came "ac2 to 5mmunition De/ot "ut P72 'aljit Singh has gi3en !ifferent 3ersion. ;e has state! that when Paramjit Singh was ma!e to sit in the car he mo3e! along with his "rother "ut he was as2e! to remain at the flour mill. 8hen he came to the house on a scooter an! on enDuir$ it was learnt that the sai! /ersons ha! not come to the house along with Paramjit Singh. 8hen he a//roache! his father in the 5mmunition De/ot an! narrate! the entire stor$ to him. 8hereafter his father met Senior Store +ee/er of the 5mmunition De/ot who is General Secretar$ of the ,m/lo$ees Fnion. 8herefore as /er 'aljit Singh his father ha! not accom/anie! him for chasing car or for going to their house an! he has not firstl$ gone to 5mmunition De/ot to inform his father. 2:* It is further su"mitte! "$ learne! !efence counsel that statements of
"oth Gur!it Singh an! 'aljit Singh were recor!e! un!er Section 1<1 Cr.PC an! !uring enDuir$. Gur!it Singh was confronte! with his statement ,-.D5 recor!e! "$ SP(D* an! ,-.D' recor!e! "$ then Sessions Ju!ge. 'aljit Singh was confronte! with his statements ,-.DC ,-.DD. 6al Singh (P7:* was confronte! with his statement ,-.D,. 8here are material im/ro3ements in the statements ma!e "$ these witnesses in the court. 8herefore the statements of all these witnesses "eing full of im/ro3ements are lia"le to "e ignore!. &o reliance can "e /lace! on these statements. 6ore so when these statements are also contra!ictor$ to the contents of the a//lication mo3e! to ;onE"le ;igh Court. 2#* It is further su"mitte! "$ learne! !efence counsel that the
com/lainant si!e is ta2ing !ifferent 3ersion. 5s /er one 3ersion Paramjit Singh
:0
has "een !one to !eath "$ torture in /olice custo!$. P71? Su2h!e3 Singh has "een e-amine! to show that when he e-amine! Paramjit Singh at the instance of 6;C Su2h!e3 Singh at Police Station Sa!ar 'athin!a SI Gurjeet Singh an! 'arjin!er +umar 5SI were /resent. 'loo! was oo@ing from the nose an! mouth of Paramjit Singh. ;is hairs were untie!. ,$es were wi!e o/en an! still. 5lthough Su2h!e3 Singh has not !isclose! his relationshi/ with Paramjit Singh an! his famil$ "ut other e3i!ence sufficientl$ /ro3es that he is closel$ relate! to the famil$ of com/lainant. P71 Gur!it Singh has a!mitte! in his cross e-amination that his el!er "rother Chhota Singh was "a/ti@e! Si2h. +aur Singh son of Chhota Singh was not "a/ti@e! an! he has left his house in the $ear 1=?? after his marriage an! !i! not return since then. Su2h!e3 Singh has a!mitte! in cross e-amination that Chhota Singh is his father.in.law. ;e was "a/ti@e! Si2h. ;e has a!mitte! that +aur Singh son of Chhota Singh was his $ounger "rother. in.law an! +aur Singh ha! left house on 2n! !a$ of his marriage an! till !ate he has not returne!. 8herefore these statements of com/lainant Gur!it Singh an! P71? Su2h!e3 Singh /ro3es that the$ are closel$ relate!. Su2h!e3 Singh has "een intro!uce! as witness onl$ to /ro3e that Paramjit Singh was torture! "$ the /olice. ;is statement shows that he is not Dualifie! me!ical /ractitioner. In his cross e-amination he has state! that normal /ulse rate is :? to <0 "eats. 'ut he cannot sa$ a"out heart "eat. In case Su2h!e3 Singh was ha3ing an$ 2nowle!ge regar!ing me!ical science he was not su//ose! to "e ignorant a"out /ulse rate an! heart "eat rate also which are 3er$ common factors. 'ut in com/laint mo3e! to ;igh Court Com/lainant has !isclose! nothing regar!ing torture as state! "$
:1
P71? Su2h!e3 Singh. Crom the contents of a//lication to ;onE"le ;igh Court it is ma!e out that case of the Com/lainant is that his son has "een eliminate! in some encounter. 8herefore the stan! of the com/lainant is contra!ictor$. 8he com/lainant Gur!it Singh an! P7 'aljit Singh ha3e a!mitte! that &achattar Singh was wor2ing at their flour mill when Paramjit Singh was /ic2e! u/. &achattar Singh was the in!e/en!ent witness "ut he is not e-amine!. 8he accuse! ha3e "een charge sheete! for offence of 2i!na//ing also "ut there is no !irect allegation of a"!uction or 2i!na//ing. 'aljit Singh has sim/l$ allege! that the /ersons in Ci3il Fniform as2e! Paramjit Singh to accom/an$ them an! the !ocuments "rought on recor! "$ the /rosecution itself shows that Paramjit Singh was arreste! in case CI> &o.2? of 2<.3.1==2. 8herefore the offence of 2i!na//ing is not ma!e out. 2<* It is further su"mitte! "$ learne! !efence counsel that the
com/lainant si!e has moti3e to falsel$ im/licate the accuse! with the /ur/ose to sa3e Paramjit Singh from the net of criminal lia"ilit$. Paramjit Singh was a !rea!e! terrorist. ;e was wante! "$ /olice in num"er of cases. P71 Gur!it Singh has a!mitte! in cross e-amination that his son Paramjit Singh was "a/ti@e! in June 1=?:. ;e has a!mitte! that house of Ins/ector De3in!er +umar Sharma was situate! in front of their house an! De3in!er +umar Sharma Police Ins/ector was shot "$ e-tinguisher on 12.2.1==1 in his house. ;e has a!mitte! that at the time of "lue star o/eration searches were con!ucte! in their localit$ continuousl$ for ? !a$s as the /olice was a//rehen!ing that some terrorist might "e hi!ing. )f course he has refuse! to a!mit that /olice has rai!e! their house
:2
2.3 times "efore 14.4.1==2 for ma2ing interrogation from Paramjit Singh "ut the co/ies of Gimnies ,-.P71:0%1 to ,-.P71:0%# relie! u/on "$ the /rosecution itself su//orts this fact. 8herefore inference can "e !rawn that Paramjit Singh was a !rea!e! terrorist. ;e was wante! in num"er of cases. 5s such his !isa//earance from the /olice custo!$ with the intention to sa3e himself from net of criminal lia"ilit$ is not to "e rule! out. 24* It is also su"mitte! "$ learne! !efence counsel that accuse! 'arjin!er
+umar Sharma as D7< has !etaile! the circumstances un!er which Paramjit Singh was arreste! an! he esca/e! from /olice custo!$. Prosecution has also /ro3e! this fact "$ /ro!ucing on recor! the !ocuments regar!ing memo of arrest !isclosure statement suffere! "$ Paramjit Singh an! case !iar$ which also /ro3e that Paramjit Singh was arreste! in case CI> &o.2? an! he suffere! !isclosure statement an! he has esca/e! from the /olice custo!$. 8herefore the /rosecution has faile! to /ro3e its case "$ affirmati3e e3i!ence. Con3iction is not to "e "ase! on conjectures an! surmises. 8he !eath of Paramjit Singh is not to "e /resume! onl$ for the reason that he is not seen after 14.4.1==2. 5s /er Section 10? of In!ian ,3i!ence 5ct also there can "e /resum/tion of !eath "ut not /resum/tion of mur!er. Crom all angles case of the /rosecution is not /ro3e!. 8o su//ort these su"missions learne! !efence counsel cite! case law Cri1inal A66eal Nos.$ *.$ of 200, titled as State of Pun4a2 8ersus
%a5inder Pal Singh Bhullar < =rs. et&. de&ided on $.12.2011, >PA No.1 * of 200# titled as Ba;hshi !a1 and others 8ersus Satwant Singh Mana; and others de&ided on 26.11.200*, Chhita and another 8ersus State of !a4asthan
:3
1,## Su6re1e Court Cases 9Crl.: Page 1** wherein "enefit of !ou"t was gi3en to the accuse! for the reason that sole e$e witness an! 3arious statements ma!e him !uring the in3estigation an! trial ren!ere! the entire /rosecution 3ersion sus/ect9 State 8ersus ?ani Ma;roo and another 1,$$ Cri1inal >aw "i1es 6age $ 9J</: wherein it was o"ser3e! that the witnesses 2nowing facts if 2ee/s Duite for a num"er of !a$s a !ou"t is cast on the testimon$ of such a witness9 ".".Anton3 8ersus State of /erala 20019*: !C! 9Crl.: Page (*6 9SC: to su"mit that re/ort of Commission is not "in!ing on Police
In3estigation 5genc$. In3estigating 5genc$ can form !ifferent o/inion on "asis of e3i!ence collecte! "$ the In3estigation 5genc$9 Narendra Singh and Anr. 8ersus State of M.P. 200(9*: !C! 9Crl.: Page 61* 9SC: to su"mit that when mur!er case is "ase! on circumstantial e3i!ence an! cause of !eath is shrou!e! with m$ster$ "enefit shoul! go to accuse! an! sus/icion howe3er gra3e cannot ta2e /lace of /roof. 2?* I ha3e gi3en m$ careful consi!eration to the ri3al su"missions an!
gone through the case law relie! u/on "$ learne! counsel for the /arties. 2=* 5s is clear from the a"o3e Duote! facts of the case as well as
e3i!ence "rought on recor! the criminal law was set into motion firstl$ on the "asis of mo3ing a//lication to ;onE"le ;igh Court co/$ of which is /ro3e! as ,-.P5. 8his a//lication was su"mitte! "$ com/lainant Gurjit Singh "efore the ;onE"le 6r.Justice ;.S.'e!i then Ju!ge Punja" H ;ar$ana ;igh Court Chan!igarh. In this a//lication the com/lainant allege! that on 14.4.1==2 his son Paramjit Singh was as2e! to accom/an$ "$ some uni!entifie! /ersons in
::
ci3il !ress on the /lea that search of his house is to "e con!ucte! "ut Paramjit Singh was ta2en to some un2nown /lace an! thereafter wherea"outs of his son are not 2nown. It is also !isclose! in this a//lication that on enDuir$ SSP re3eale! that his son was "rought "$ the /olice "ut he esca/e! from the custo!$ on the ne-t !a$. 8herefore from the allegations of the com/lainant an! !efence 3ersion for !is/osal of this case the following /oints are to "e !etermine!B. 1. 7hether Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh was 2i!na//e! "$ the /olice on 14.4.1==2M 2. 7hether Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh was arreste! on 14.4.1==2 in case CI> &o.2? of 2<.3.1==2M 3. 7hether Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh suffere! !isclosure statement on 14.4.1==2 regar!ing concealment of some arms an! ammunitionM :. 7hether Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh esca/e! from the /olice custo!$ !uring am"ush (cross firing* "etween the /olice /art$ an! some un2nown /ersonsM #. 7hether Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh is still ali3eM 30* 8here is no !is/ute of the legal /ro/osition that onus to /ro3e its case
is u/on the /rosecution. Prosecution has e-amine! as man$ as 21 witnesses. 5s /ointe! "$ learne! !efence counsel an! alrea!$ !etaile! a"o3e P7# Gur!as Singh P7< Gurmail Singh P74 ;C Su2hjin!er Singh P7? ;C 'hagwant Singh P7= C.Jatin!er Singh P711 >anjit Singh P712 Gur!ee/ Singh P713 ;armeet Singh P71: Gurtej Singh P714 Gurtej Singh P720 Ins/ector Jogin!er Singh an! P721 SI >achh/al Singh ha3e /ro!uce! recor! to /ro3e the recruitment an! /lace of /osting of !ifferent accuse!. Some witnesses ha3e "rought on recor! co/ies of DD>s an! other !ocuments. P710 ;ar"hajan
:#
Singh an! P71# ;ar!ee/ Singh ha3e recor!e! statements of some witnesses !uring the in3estigation of this case. 8herefore statements of all these witnesses are of formal nature. 31* &ow it is to "e seen whether from the statements of remaining
witnesses case of the /rosecution stan! /ro3e! or not. 5s /er com/lainant his son was /ic2e! u/ "$ some un2nown /ersons on 14.4.1==2 "ut the a//lication ,-.P5 was mo3e! on 2=.10.1==:. In this wa$ there is !ela$ of more than two $ears in re/orting matter to the higher authorities "ut !es/ite this fact there is some other e3i!ence which goes to show that the com/lainant intimate! the authorities at the 3er$ earliest. Com/lainant Gur!it Singh when a//eare! in witness "o- as P71 has !e/ose! on oath that on that 3er$ !a$ he got a//lication written from +uljit Singh an! su"mitte! "efore Comman!ant Sh.S.S.Passi. 8he 5!ministrati3e officer 6r.'oro accom/anie! him to the office of SSP 'athin!a "ut SSP was not a3aila"le. ;e again a//roache! SSP 'athin!a on 1? 1= Jul$ 1==2 "ut the SSP was again not a3aila"le. )n 20.4.1==2 he accom/anie! "$ 6r.'oro met SSP 'athin!a an! su"mitte! a//lication which was han!e! o3er "$ him to the Comman!ant. +uljit Singh has a//eare! in witness "o- as P73 an! has corro"orate! this 3ersion of the com/lainant "$ !e/osing that on 14.4.1==2 Gur!it Singh came to him an! !isclose! him the facts. ;e along with Gur!it Singh met Comman!ant of 5mmunition De/ot an! Sh.SS Passi trie! to tal2 to SSP 'athin!a "ut SSP was not a3aila"le an! the$ were !irecte! to go to SSP an! enDuire a"out the matter. Sh.SS Passi (>etire! Colonel* has a//eare! in witness "o- as P71=. ;e has
:<
also !e/ose! that on 14.4.1==2 +uljit Singh an! Gur!it Singh a//eare! "efore him in his office an! !isclose! him that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh son of Gur!it Singh has "een /ic2e! u/ "$ the /olice an! he "e trace! out. ;e ma!e attem/t to tal2 to SSP 'athin!a tele/honicall$ "ut SSP 'athin!a was not a3aila"le at 'athin!a. ;e has further !e/ose! that on 20.4.1==2 Gur!it Singh /ro!uce! a//lication "efore him along with the letter scri"e! "$ +uljit Singh. ;e !irecte! 6ajor 6.5.+han to write letter to SSP 'athin!a to trace out Paramjit Singh. ;e has also /ro3e! letter ,-.P7=05 written un!er the
signatures of then 6ajor 6.5.+han an! his en!orsement ,-.P71=0' on the letter !ate! 20.4.1==2. ;e has further !e/ose! that in res/onse to this letter ,-.P71=05 letter ,-.P71<05 written "$ SSP 'athin!a to 6ajor 6.5.+han was recei3e! an! /ut u/ "efore him.P71< 5nil +umar Sharma was SSP 'athin!a an! has /ro3e! letter ,-.P71<05 written "$ him in res/onse to letter !ate! 20.04.=2. 8herefore it is /ro3e! that the com/lainant imme!iatel$
re/orte! matter to the /olice through his office. ;ence it cannot "e conclu!e! that there was an$ !ela$ on the /art of com/lainant in re/orting matter to the authorities. P72 'aljit Singh is son of the com/lainant. ;e has !e/ose! that on 14.4.1==2 Paramjit Singh was rea!ing the &ews/a/er outsi!e the flour mill.<.4 /ersons in ci3il uniform came on two cars an! Gurjit Singh (since /roclaime! offen!er* an! 'arjin!er +umar were amongst those /ersons. ;e has further !e/ose! that Gurjit Singh as2e! his "rother to accom/an$ them an! thereafter Paramjit Singh was ma!e to sit in the "lue colour car an! car mo3e! towar!s 8hermal /lant. 8hereafter the$ ha3e not hear! wherea"outs of Paramjit Singh.
:4
8herefore as /er 'aljit Singh (P72* his "rother Paramjit Singh was /ic2e! u/ from his flour mill on 14.4.1==2. P71: has /ro!uce! co/$ of CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2 in a!!ition to other !ocuments. ;e has also /ro!uce! co/$ of Gimn$ ,-.P71:08 !ate! 14.4.1==2. 5s /er this recor! Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh was arreste! "$ 5SI 1a2h"ir Singh from 'i"i 7ala Chow2. ;is /ersonal search memo ,-.P71:0F is also /ro3e! which further shows that as /er /olice Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh was arreste! on 14.4.1==2 in case &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2. P71 Gur!it Singh an! P72 'aljit Singh ha3e mainl$ /ro3e! that Paramjit Singh was /ic2e! u/ from their flour mill. 8he !efence 3ersion is that he was arreste! on 14.4.1==2.5ccuse! 'arjin!er +umar while a//earing in !efence e3i!ence has also state! that Paramjit Singh son of Gur!it Singh was arreste! in CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2. 8herefore it is a!mitte! an! /ro3e! that on 14.4.1==2 Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh was in the custo!$ of /olice either "$ wa$ of arrest or "$ wa$ of 2i!na//ing. 7hen the custo!$ of Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh is a!mitte! the allege! im/ro3ements0contra!ictions in the statements of Pws Gur!it Singh an! 'aljit Singh "ecomes immaterial. 8herefore statements of these witnesses cannot "e !is"elie3e! onl$ for the reason of im/ro3ements in their statements or contra!ictions in their statements. 32* P71: Gurtej Singh has also /ro!uce! on recor! co/$ of !isclosure
statement ,-.P71:0C state! to "e suffere! "$ Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh "efore SI Gurjit Singh in the /resence of 1a2h"ir Singh an! 5SI 'arjin!er +umar. D7< 'arjin!er +umar has also !e/ose! that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh suffere! !isclosure statement "efore then S;) Gurjit Singh. 5s /er this
:?
!isclosure statement Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh !isclose! that he has 2e/t conceale! one 5+ :4 rifle two 6aga@ine :0 cartri!ges in one tractor tu"e 2e/t in one jute "ag an! he has conceale! this "ag in the area of Jhum"a near canal "ri!ge on the roa! si!e lea!ing to 3illage Peori. 8herefore the !efence 3ersion is that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh suffere! !isclosure statement regar!ing concealment of arms an! ammunition. 8he 3ersion of the accuse! is that Paramjit Singh was "eting a2en for effecting reco3er$. 8his reco3er$ relates to CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2 i.e. more than a"out : months "efore arrest. It is also case of the /rosecution that on the wa$ two uni!entifie! /ersons am"ush the /olice /art$ an! /olice /art$ o/ene! fire in !efence. 5fter sto//ing of firing it was notice! that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh has esca/e! from the /olice custo!$. 7hether the suffering of !isclosure statement an! whether the am"ush on /olice /art$ is "elie3a"le or not is to "e e-amine! in the light of the atten!ing circumstances. 33* 'efore /rocee!ing further the o"ser3ations of ;onE"le Su/reme
Court re/orte! in the case of Prithi6al Singh et&. 9Su6ra: "ecomes rele3ant. Cor the sa2e of /ro/er a//reciation of these o"ser3ations a "rief resume of facts of this case as notice! from the cite! ju!gment will "e also hel/ful. Sh.Jaswant Singh +halra a human right acti3ist ha3ing allegiance to Shiromani 52ali Dal was allege! to ha3e "een a"!ucte! from his resi!ential house &o.? +a"ir Par2 5mritsar on <.=.1==# at 1.00 )ECloc2. Sh.>aji3 Singh (P71#* was /resent in the house of Sh.+halra at the time of a"!uction. +ir/al Singh >an!hawa ha! seen a//ellant namel$ Jas/al Singh DSP Surin!er Pal
:=
Jas"ir Singh an! Satnam Singh along with other accuse! /ersons rushing through +a"ir Par2 with the !ecease! Jaswant Singh +halra insi!e a 6aruti 3an. Smt.Paramjit +aur (P72* wife of !ecease! came to her house from Fni3ersit$ where she was wor2ing on "eing informe! "$ >aji3 Singh (P71#*.She ma!e search for her hus"an! "ut in 3ain. She ma!e com/laint on the same !a$ at :.00 /m ma2ing a statement to SI 'al!e3 Singh at +a"ir Par2 that her hus"an! ha! "een 2i!na//e! at 1.00 )E Cloc2 "$ some /ersons in /olice uniform in 6aruti Van of white colour "earing &o.D&'.#=<=. )n the "asis of this statement CI> &o.42 (,-.P5* was registere! on 4.=.1==# at PS Islama"a! District 5mritsar at =.30 am un!er Section 3<# IPC "ut no /rogress in in3estigation coul! "e ma!e an! wherea"outs of Jaswant Singh +halra coul! not "e 2nown. 5s /er !irections of ;onE"le Su/reme Court in3estigation was transferre! to C'I "ut wherea"outs of Jaswant Singh +halra coul! not "e trace! "$ C'I also. +ulwant Singh (P71:* in his statement recor!e! "$ C'I un!er Section 1<1 Cr.PC re3eale! that he ha! "een !etaine! in a case un!er the &arcotic Drugs H Ps$chotro/ic Su"stances 5ct 1=?# on :.=.1==# "$ the /olice officials of PS Jha"al. Sh.Jaswant Singh +halra was also "rought to the sai! Police Station on <.=.1==#.During the trial some e3i!ence was /ro!uce! to /ro3e that Jaswant Singh +halra ha! "een mur!ere! "$ the a//ellant an! other accuse! /ersons secretl$ an! his !ea! "o!$ has "een thrown in the canal near ;ari2a at mi!night just after Diwali in the $ear 1==#. 5s such /rosecution was !irecte! to file su//lementar$ re/ort un!er Section 143(?* of Cr.PC. 5fter conclusion of trial all the a//ellants of the cite! case an! some other accuse! /ersons were con3icte!
#0
un!er Section 3<:03: IPC 30203: IPC an! 20103: IPC. 8he a//eal was file! "$ accuse! 5marjit Singh an! other a//ellants. 8he con3iction of a//ellants was maintaine! "$ ;onE"le ;igh Court an! the ;onE"le ;igh Court has enhance! the sentence of four a//ellants from 4 $ears >I to life im/risonment un!er Section 3<: IPC. 8he a//ellants /referre! a//eal "efore the ;onE"le Su/reme Court. 8he a//eal of the a//ellants was !ismisse!. 3:* It was o"ser3e! "$ ;onE"le Su/reme Court N In a &ase where the
6erson is alleged to ha5e died in 6oli&e &ustod3, it is diffi&ult to get an3 ;ind of e5iden&e. !arel3 in &ases of 6oli&e torture or &ustodial death, dire&t o&ular e5iden&e is a5aila2le of the &o16li&it3 of the 6oli&e 6ersonnel, who alone &an onl3 e@6lain the &ir&u1stan&es in whi&h a 6erson in their &ustod3 had died. Bound as the3 are 23 the ties of 2rotherhood, it is not un;nown that 6oli&e 6ersonnel 6refer to re1ain silent and 1ore often than not e5en 6er5ert the truth to sa5e their &olleaguesA. In this re/orte! case ;onE"le
5/e- Court has also re/ro!uce! o"ser3ations alrea!$ recor!e! in earlier !ecisions which are as un!erB.. B7@traordinar3 situation de1and e@traordinar3 re1ed3 while dealing with an un6re&edented &ase, the &ourt is to inno5ate the law and 1a3 also 6ass un&on5entional order ;ee6ing in 1ind that e@traordinar3 fa&ts situation reCuires e@traordinar3 1easuresA. 3#* 5t this stage I woul! also li2e to ma2e it clear that the !ecision of
;onE"le ;igh Court in 1P5 &o.1#3 of 200? (!eci!e! on 2<.11.2013* an! Criminal 5//eal &o.4#3.4## of 200= !eci!e! on 4.12.2011 are not hel/ful to
#1
the accuse! as in these !ecisions the matter was regar!ing transfer of in3estigation to other agenc$ "ut in this case the in3estigation has alrea!$ "een con!ucte! "$ the /olice an! re/ort has "een su"mitte!. 3<* +ee/ing in 3iew the a"o3e o"ser3ations of ;onE"le 5/e- Court it is
to "e !eci!e! whether the 3ersion of the accuse! regar!ing suffering of !isclosure statement "$ Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh an! regar!ing am"ush on /olice /art$ an! esca/ing of Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh from /olice custo!$ ins/ire confi!ence or is highl$ im/ro"a"le un"elie3a"le an! unnatural. 5s /er !efence 3ersion Paramjit Singh was arreste! in case CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2 for offence un!er Section 30403: IPC an! Section 2# 5rms 5ct. Co/$ of C.I.>.no.2? is "rought on recor! as ,-.P71:05. 5s /er this CI> on 2<.3.1==2 /olice /art$ hea!e! "$ 5SI 'u!h Singh Incharge PP 'alluana was /resent at canal "ri!ge in the area of Jhum"a. 5t a"out =.00 /m two /ersons came on foot. 8he$ were signale! "$ search light to sto/ "ut the$ o/ene! firing towar!s the /olice /art$ with the intention to 2ill them. Police /art$ also re/lie! "$ firing. 8he firing too2 /lace for a"out 1#.20 minutes. 5fter sto//ing of firing it was foun! that one Si2h $oungman ha! !ie! at the s/ot an! the other manage! to esca/e. 8herefore from this CI> &o.2? it is clear that name of Paramjit Singh was not mentione! in this CI>. 8here is also nothing to show that an$ mem"er of /olice /art$ has recei3e! an$ injur$. Gimn$ &o.13 ( co/$ ,-.P71:0G* !ate! 2.4.1==2 was recor!e! in case CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2. It is re/orte! that from secret information it is 2nown that the /erson who esca/e! on 2<.3.1==2 was Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh 'a"ar son of Gur!it Singh
#2
an! if he is arreste! further clue of the case can "e 2nown. 8herefore name of Paramjit Singh figure! for the first time on 2.4.1==2 an! he was arreste! on 14.4.1==2. 5s /er /rosecution 3ersion when the /olice /art$ was going "$ ta2ing Paramjit Singh for effecting reco3er$ of the wea/on the /olice /art$ was attac2e! "$ two /ersons in the area of 3illage Jhum"a an! firing too2 /lace for a"out 2#.30 minutes. It is also case of the /rosecution that after sto//age of firing it was notice! that Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh esca/e! un!er the co3er of !ar2ness. 5s /er reco3er$ memo ,-.P71:0P 1# s/ent cartri!ges of 5+ :4 were reco3ere! from one /lace an! 10 s/ent cartri!ges were reco3ere! from another /lace near the fiel!s. 8herefore as /er !efence 3ersion the assailants fire! 2# roun!s towar!s the /olice /art$. P7< ;C Gurmail Singh has "rought on recor! co/$ of DD> !ate! 1?.4.1==2 which shows that 5SI 'arjin!er +umar fire! 1# roun!s from S1> SI Gurjit Singh fire! 14 roun!s C.;arin!er Singh fire! 1: roun!s of 51> an! P;G +amaljit Singh fire! 12 roun!s of 3L3 rifle. 8herefore as /er !efence 3ersion four mem"ers of /olice /art$ fire! #? roun!s towar!s the assailants "ut again neither an$ assailant nor an$ mem"er of the /olice /art$ has recei3e! an$ injur$. 34* 8he !efence 3ersion that Paramjit Singh manage! to esca/e after
sto//ing of firing un!er the co3er of !ar2 is also highl$ im/ro"a"le an! un"elie3a"le. It is not the case where Paramjit Singh was "eing ta2en for reco3er$ in a /re /lanne! manner. 5s /er !efence 3ersion SI Gurjit Singh reache! at PP 'alluana an! he came to 2now that Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh has "een arreste! in case CI> &o.2?. SI Gurjit Singh interrogate! Paramjit
#3
Singh. 7hen he suffere! !isclosure statement an! imme!iatel$ thereafter he was "eing ta2en to /lace of reco3er$. 8herefore there is nothing to show that assailants were alrea!$ ha3ing information that Paramjit Singh J Dhanna Singh is "eing "rought to that area for effecting reco3er$. 3?* It is highl$ im/ro"a"le that Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh will
manage to esca/e when firing was "etween "oth the si!es. If Paramjit Singh ha! not esca/e! !uring cross firing then there was no /ossi"ilit$ of his esca/e after sto//ing of firing "etween "oth the si!es. ,3en otherwise from the allege! !isclosure statement the /olice /art$ was aware a"out the /lace where Paramjit Singh has 2e/t conceale! arms an! ammunition. 8he /olice /art$ coul! ha3e effecte! reco3er$ "$ going to that /lace. 8here is nothing on recor! to show that an$ effort was ma!e to effect reco3er$ from the !isclose! /lace e3en thereafter. Disclosure statement of Paramjit Singh is thum" mar2e! "ut he was state!l$ e!ucate! an! !oing jo" .If Paramjit Singh has esca/e! from /olice /art$ the /olice /art$ was also to ma2e sincere efforts for his search "ut there is nothing on recor! to show that an$ serious efforts were ma!e for search of Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh after 14.4.1==2. 8herefore all these facts ma2es the 3ersion of suffering of !isclosure statement ta2ing of Paramjit Singh at night time for effecting reco3er$ an! am"ush on /olice /art$ highl$ im/ro"a"le un"elie3a"le an! !ou"tful. 3=* &ow the Duestion is whether Paramjit Singh is ali3e as claime! "$
!efence 3ersion. 5s /er !efence 3ersion Paramjit Singh was wante! onl$ in case CI> &o.2?. 5s alrea!$ mentione! he was not name! in this CI>. &o /olice
#:
official has recei3e! an$ injur$ in this occurrence resulting in registration of CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2. Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh was also name! in this case onl$ on the "asis of secret information. &o e$e witness has come forwar! to /ro3e in3ol3ement of Paramjit Singh in case CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2. In these circumstances it cannot "e conclu!e! that Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh was facing an$ serious allegation which force! him to lea3e his famil$ at the merc$ of go!. P71 Gur!it Singh has !e/ose! that Paramjit Singh was marrie!. ;e was ha3ing two chil!ren. In these circumstances Paramjit Singh was ha3ing no reason to remain awa$ from his famil$ onl$ for his allege! in3ol3ement in case CI> &o.2?. )f course accuse! ha3e e-amine! D71 Su2h!e3 Singh D72 Ghu!har Singh an! D7: 6ohri >am to /ro3e
Paramjit Singh is still ali3e. D71 Su2h!e3 Singh has !e/ose! that on 21.=.2012 he has seen Paramjit Singh at ;a@oor Sahi". 8here is nothing on recor! to show that Su2h!e3 Singh was ha3ing an$ frien!shi/ or relation with Paramjit Singh. Paramjit Singh is missing since 1==2. It is highl$ im/ro"a"le that Su2h!e3 Singh will ha3e "een a"le to i!entif$ Paramjit Singh after a ga/ of 20 $ears more so when he was not ha3ing an$ relation0frien!shi/ with Paramjit Singh. ;e is from 3illage 6ehraj Patti whereas Paramjit Singh is resi!ent of 'athin!a. D72 Ghu!har Singh has also !e/ose! that a"out 1# $ears "ac2 he ha! 3isite! Patna Sahi" an! tal2e! with Paramjit Singh for a"out half an hour. 5gain at the cost of re/etition there is nothing to show that Ghu!har Singh was also ha3ing an$ frien!shi/0relations with Paramjit Singh. ;ow he i!entifie! Paramjit Singh is not e-/laine!. 6oreo3er he was confronte! with his a//lication ,-.PC an!
##
affi!a3it ,-.PD. although he has state! that his signatures were o"taine! un!er /ressure. 'ut as /er a//lication ,-.PC an! affi!a3it ,-.PD Ghu!har Singh has alrea!$ state! that he ha! ne3er 3isite! Patna Sahi" an! he has ne3er met Paramjit Singh. In these circumstances from the statement of Ghu!har Singh also it cannot "e acce/te! that Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh is ali3e an! was seen at Patna Sahi". 8he statement of D7: Ins/ector 6ohri 1al also !oes not /ro3e that Paramjit Singh is still ali3e. ;e ha! "een e-amine! to /ro3e that information was recei3e! that Paramjit Singh has "een seen at ;a@oor Sahi". ;e along with Su2hmail Singh ;C 3isite! Guru!wara Sahi" in ci3il !ress "ut he has further state! that he too2 /hotogra/h of Paramjit Singh to i!entif$ him. In cross e-amination he has a!mitte! that he was ha3ing /hotogra/h of Paramjit Singh which was a"out 2#.30 $ears ol!. ;e has a!mitte! that he !o not 2now Paramjit Singh /ersonall$. In these circumstances Ins/ector 6ohri 1al was not in a /osition to i!entif$ Paramjit Singh an! to /rocure his arrest. 8hese facts shows that 3ersion /ut forth "$ Ins/ector 6ohri 1al is highl$ im/ro"a"le un"elie3a"le. 8he onl$ /ur/ose is to ma2e last attem/t to sa3e the accuse! (fellow colleagues* from the net of criminal lia"ilit$. 8herefore the !efence 3ersion that Paramjit Singh is still ali3e is not acce/ta"le. :0* )f course /rosecution has to /ro3e its case "$ affirmati3e e3i!ence.
Prosecution is also reDuire! to /ro3e that the accuse! ha3e cause! mur!er of Paramjit Singh. P71? has "een e-amine! to /ro3e that Paramjit Singh was seen "$ him at Police Station Sa!ar 'athin!a in a torture! con!ition an! when his /ulse an! heart "eat were missing. 'ut statement of this witness !oes not ins/ire
#<
confi!ence for num"er of reasons. Cirstl$ he has not !isclose! a"out his relationshi/ with Paramjit Singh "ut from the cross e-amination it stan! /ro3e! that he is marrie! to !aughter of Chhota Singh real "rother of com/lainant Gur!it Singh. ;e has also not !isclose! this fact to an$ other /erson. ;e has claime! me!ical /ractitioner "ut there is nothing to show that he is ha3ing an$ e!ucation of me!ical line. In his cross e-amination he has rather state! normal /ulse rate :? to <0 "eats /er minute an! he cannot sa$ a"out heart "eat. If he is ha3ing an$ "asic 2nowle!ge of me!ical science he was not to "e so ignorant regar!ing this "asic factor. 8herefore statement of P71? Su2h!e3 Singh is not hel/ful to /ro3e that the accuse! ha3e cause! !eath of Paramjit Singh. :1* 5s alrea!$ o"ser3e! in the cite! case of Prithi6al Singh et&.9Su6ra:
in such a case court has to inno3ate law an! ma$ also /ass uncon3entional or!er 2ee/ing in 3iew that e-traor!inar$ fact situation reDuires e-traor!inar$ measures. It is o"ser3e! in earlier /art that there is nothing to show that Paramjit Singh was actuall$ wante! in CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2. 8he suffering of !isclosure statement "$ Paramjit Singh is consi!ere! highl$ im/ro"a"le
un"elie3a"le. 8a2ing of Paramjit Singh for effecting reco3er$ an! am"ush on /olice /art$ is also consi!ere! as highl$ un"elie3a"le an! im/ro"a"le. Paramjit Singh was a!mitte!l$ in /olice custo!$ on 14.4.1==2 an! he is not hear! thereafter. 8here is nothing to show that the /olice has ma!e an$ serious efforts to ascertain wherea"outs of Paramjit Singh. In these circumstances the onl$ conclusion is that Paramjit Singh has "een eliminate! "$ the accuse! "$ hatching a criminal cons/irac$. 5lthough Paramjit Singh is shown to ha3e "een
#4
arreste! in case CI> &o.2? !ate! 2<.3.1==2 "ut as mentione! a"o3e the /ur/oses to /ic2 u/ Paramjit Singh was onl$ to eliminate him. 'aljit Singh (P72* has claime! witness when Paramjit Singh was /ic2e! u/ "$ the /ersons in ci3il !ress. 7hen a//eare! in witness "o- as P72 he has onl$ /ro3e! i!entit$ of accuse! Gurjit Singh an! 'arjin!er +umar Sharma who were /resent amongst /ersons who ha3e /ic2e! u/ Paramjit Singh for search of his house. 8here is no other e3i!ence to /ro3e that the other accuse! were also /resent at that time. 8herefore the offence un!er Section 3<: IPC is /ro3e! onl$ against accuse! 'arjin!er +umar Sharma. :2* :3* &o other contention has "een raise! "$ the learne! !efence counsel. Cor the reasons recor!e! a"o3e I ha3e come to the conclusion that
the case of /rosecution stan! /ro3e! free from !ou"t. It has "een /ro3e! that on on 14.4.1==2 Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh was /ic2e! u/ "$ the accuse! Gurjit Singh (since /roclaime! offen!er* an! 'arjin!er +umar Sharma. 8herefore accuse! 'arjin!er +umar Sharma stan! con3icte! un!er Section 3<: IPC. 5ll the accuse! ha3e hatche! cons/irac$ to eliminate Paramjit Singh an! the accuse! in furtherance of their criminal cons/irac$ ha3e eliminate! Paramjit Singh alias Dhanna Singh on 14.4.1==2 or thereafter an! conceale!0!estro$e! his !ea! "o!$. 8herefore all the accuse! stan! con3icte! un!er Section 3020120.' IPC 2010120.' IPC. 8he accuse! are on "ail the$ "e ta2en into custo!$. Pronoun&ed in o6en Court. %ated'10.01.201(. 9M.P.Singh Pahwa: Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda.
#?
In the Court of M.P.Singh Pahwa, Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda. Sessions Case No.01 dated 06.01.200 . !" No.1 dated 1#.0$.2012. %e&ided on'1(.01.201(. SC)000016$)201*
State
Versus
1. 'arjin!er +umar son of Surin!er +umar son of +aram Chan! age! a"out ## $ears ,-.Ins/ector r0o VP) Golla Pasa 1u!hiana. 2. Gur"achan Singh son of ;a2am Singh son of 'agga Singh age! a"out #< $ears 5SI in Police 1ine 6ansa resi!ent of ;.&o.1<0== 'ac2si!e >ose Gar!en &ational Colon$ 'athin!a9 3. 6al Singh son of 5ssa Singh son of Jagat Singh age! a"out << $ears retire! ;ea! Consta"le resi!ent of ;.&o.241:1 &aruana >oa! Gali &o.= 5mar/ura 'asti 'athin!a9 :. ;arin!er Singh son of Jiwan Singh son of 'har/ur Singh age! a"out :: $ears ;ea! Consta"le District 6ansa r0o &angal +alan now r0o +esar 7a2il 7ali Gali near District Courts 6ansa #. +anwaljit Singh son of Gur!ial Singh son of 'hajan Singh age! a"out :? $ears Consta"le resi!ent of Sucha Singh &agar Gali &o.# ;ouse &o.1#00# 'athin!a9 <. 8arlo2 Singh son of +ha@an Singh son of 7a!hawa Singh age! a"out <3 $ears retire! Consta"le resi!ent of ;.&o.2<: 3illage >ajouli 1alton +alan District
#=
District 5m"ala (;ar$ana* 4. Jagsir Singh son of Chhotu Singh son of 6ita Singh age! a"out :< $ears P;G now un!er sus/ension resi!ent of 3illage Jhan!u Patti Chughe +alan 8ehsil an! District 'athin!a9 ?. Jarnail Singh son of +aram Singh son of Chattar Singh age! a"out :# $ears P;G now or!erl$ of DSP(>* 'athin!a resi!ent of Village 'am"iha 8ehsil an! District 'athin!a. A 5ccuse!
+.I.!. No.$0 %ated 2$.*.1,,,. -nder Se&tion *6 )*(2)22*)1,*)120.B)*02 IPC Poli&e Station /otwali, Bathinda. .00000. )>D,> )C S,&8,&C, PresentB 6r.S.+.+ochhar 5!!itional Pu"lic Prosecutor for the State assiste! "$ 6r.G.S.Si!hu 5!3ocate9 5ll the con3icts in custo!$ with counsel 6r.GS +ha!ial 5!3ocate Vi!e m$ !etaile! ju!gment !ate! 10.1.201: the a"o3e sai! accuse! ha3e "een con3icte! un!er Section 3<: 3020120.' 2010120.' IPC. 8he statements of con3icts regar!ing Duantum of sentence were recor!e!. 8he$ were also hear! on the Duantum of sentence. 5ll the con3icts in their statements ha3e /ra$e! for lenienc$ on the /lea that the$ are ha3ing families to loo2 after. I ha3e gi3en m$ careful consi!eration to the ri3al su"missions. 8he con3icts ha3e /ic2e! u/ Paramjit Singh on 14.4.1==2 who ha! "een eliminate! on that 3er$ !a$ or thereafter. 8he offence committe! "$ the con3icts is heinous
<0
an! gruesome. 'ut still from the totalit$ of the circumstances I am of the o/inion that the offence !oes not fall in the rarest of rare cases to /ass or!er of !eath sentence. 8herefore the con3icts are or!ere! to un!ergo the following sentencesB &ame of the con3ict Con3icte! un!er section Sentence im/ose! In !efault of /a$ment of fine.
Bar4inder /u1ar 3<: IPC
>igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for se3en $ears an! fine im/risonment for of >s.10 0000.. three months. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for life an! fine of im/risonment for >s.10 0000.. three months. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for for three $ears an! im/risonment for fine of >s.# 0000.. two month. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for life an! fine of im/risonment for >s.10 0000.. three months. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for three $ears an! fine im/risonment for of >s.# 0000.. two month. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for life an! fine of im/risonment for >s.10 0000.. three months. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for three $ears an! fine im/risonment for of >s.# 0000.. two month. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for life an! fine of im/risonment for >s.10 0000.. three months. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for three $ears an! fine im/risonment for of >s.# 0000.. two month.
3020120.' IPC
2010120.' IPC ?ur2a&han Singh 3020120.' IPC
2010120.' IPC Mal Singh 3020120.' IPC
2010120.' IPC Darinder Singh 3020120.' IPC
2010120.' IPC
<1
/anwal4it Singh
3020120.' IPC
>igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for life an! fine of im/risonment for >s.10 0000.. three months. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for three $ears an! fine im/risonment for of >s.# 0000.. two month. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for life an! fine of im/risonment for >s.10 0000.. three months. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for three $ears an! fine im/risonment for of >s.# 0000.. two month. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for life an! fine of im/risonment for >s.10 0000.. three months. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for three $ears an! fine im/risonment for of >s.# 0000.. two month. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for life an! fine of im/risonment for >s.10 0000.. three months. >igorous im/risonment Curther rigorous for three $ears an! fine im/risonment for of >s.# 0000.. two month.
2010120.' IPC "arlo; Singh 3020120.' IPC
2010120.' IPC Jagsir Singh 3020120.' IPC
2010120.' IPC Jarnail Singh 3020120.' IPC
2010120.' IPC
5ll the sentences of con3icts shall run concurrentl$. ;owe3er /erio! of !etention alrea!$ un!ergone "$ the con3icts shall "e set off against the su"stanti3e sentence of im/risonment. In case fine is reco3ere! #0O out of it shall "e /ai! to the heirs of !ecease! as com/ensation. 8his or!er will "e treate! as /art of the ju!gment !ate! 10.1.201:. Case /ro/ert$ if an$ "e !is/ose! of after the e-/ir$ of /erio! /rescri"e! for filing a//eal or re3ision if an$ as the case ma$ "e an! outcome
<2
thereof. Cile "e consigne! to the recor! room u0s 2== Cr.PC.It will "e ta2en u/ as an! when accuse! Gurjit Singh is arreste! or a//ears in court. Pronoun&ed in o6en Court. %ated'1(.01.201(. 9M.P. Singh Pahwa: Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda.
<3
PresentB
6r.S.+.+ochhar 5!!itional Pu"lic Prosecutor assiste! "$ 6r.G.S.Si!hu 5!3ocate for the State. 5ll the con3icts in custo!$ with counsel 6r.GS +ha!ial 5!3. Vi!e m$ se/arate or!er of e3en !ate all the con3icts ha3e "een
sentence! as state! therein. Cile "e consigne! to the recor! room u0s 2== Cr.PC.It will "e ta2en u/ as an! when accuse! Gurjit Singh is arreste! or a//ears in court. Pronoun&ed in o6en Court. %ated'1(.01.201(. 9M.P. Singh Pahwa: Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda.
<:

Bathinda Custodial Death Case

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Bathinda Custodial Death Case

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

1

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

recruitment or!er of 'arjin!er +umar (,-.P7?05* an! co/$ of or!er

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

It is further su"mitte! "$ learne! 5!!l. Pu"lic Prosecutor that the

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

State Vs. Gurjeet Singh etc. 302 IPC

Bar4inder /u1ar 3<: IPC