Allowed

Sukhvir Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC29 Oct 2024CRM-M/6467/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail petition in a jail-murder FIR where the petitioner was identified on CCTV footage among prisoners who fatally assaulted an inmate. Finding no injury or assault specifically attributed to the petitioner and that he was not the main accused, the judge granted bail with conditions including surrender of firearms.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be released on bail in FIR No.175/2023 subject to bonds; surrender of all weapons/firearms and arms license within fifteen days of release.

Sukhvir Singh Vs State of Punjab — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CRM-M-6467-2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M-6467-2024 Reserved on: 18.10.2024 Pronounced on: 29.10.2024

Sukhvir Singh

...Pe��oner

Versus

State of Punjab …Respondent

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶9

Present: Mr. Brijesh Nandan, Advocate for the pe��oner.

¶10

Mr. Akshay Kumar, A.A.G, Punjab.

¶11

Ms. Bhupinder K. Bhangu, Advocate for the complainant.

¶12

****

¶13

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

¶14

FIR No.	Dated	Police Sta1on	Sec1ons
175	13.07.2023	Kotwali, District	160, 302,	303, 323, 324, 325, 326,
		Kapurthala, Punjab	332, 186,	353, 148, 149, 120-B IPC
			and 42 of	Prison Act

¶15

The pe��oner incarcerated in the FIR cap�oned above had come up before this

¶16

Court under Sec�on 439 CrPC, 1973 seeking regular bail.

¶17

In note (3) of the bail pe��on, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

¶18

The facts and allega�ons are being taken from the status report filed by the State, which reads as follows:

¶19

“4. That it is submi�ed that, the factual matrix pertaining to the present case-FIR are that, on 13.07.2023 at about 07.30 AM, the complainantHemant Sharma, the then Assistant Superintendent of Police, Central Jail Kapurthala received informa-on from Jail Control Room by Duty Warden Puran Singh that prisoners of barrack Nos.6, 7 and 8, in connivance with each other and due to some earlier grudge, had inflicted injuries on the person of jail inmate Simaranjit Singh @ Simar with some sharp edged weapon.

¶20

JYOTI 2024.10.29 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶21

¶22

CRM-M-6467-2024

¶23

5. That it was also stated by the complainant that said prisoners also inflicted injuries on the persons of other inmates as well, who tried to save Simaranjit Singh @ Simar. Therea:er, said Simaranjit Singh @ Simar died during his treatment. Accordingly, the present FIR was ini-ally registered against 22 persons.”

¶24

The pe��oner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent condi�ons and contends that further pre-trial incarcera�on would cause an irreversible injus�ce to the pe��oner and his family.

¶25

The State’s counsel opposes bail and refers to the status report.

¶26

It would be appropriate to refer to the following por�ons of the status report, which read as follows:

¶27

“3. That present FIR No.175 of 13.07.2023 U/s 160, 302, 303, 323, 324, 325, 326, 332, 186, 353, 148, 149, 120-B IPC and Sec-on 42 Prisons Act was registered at Police Sta-on Kotwali, District Kapurthala was ini-ally against 22 accused persons namely:-

¶28

i. Raj Kumar, ii. Vijay Kumar, iii. Anu Kumar, iv. Ranjit Singh, v. Sajan,

¶29

vi. Kamlapreet Singh, vii. Kamaljit Singh, viii. Palwinder Singh,

¶30

ix. Rahul Kumar, x. Surinder Singh, xi. Vikas Kalyan,

¶31

xii. Tarsem Singh@ Yodha, xiii. Munish Parkash@ Khanna,

¶32

xiv. Gurjit Singh@ Manni, xv. Tarsem Singh@ Sethi, xvi. Gurjit Singh,

¶33

xvii. Suraj Singh, xviii. Sukhvir Singh i.e. present pe--oner,

¶34

xix. Aman Kumar@ Amna, xx. Sandip Singh@ Sabi,

¶35

xxi. Sanjiv Kumar@ Nanu, xxii. Davinder Pal Singh@ Bugga.

¶36

That following accused were nominated vide DDR No.32 Dated 09.07.2023:-

¶37

i. Lovepreet, ii. Gagandeep Singh, iii. Ja-n Sethi@Aanda,

¶38

iv. Ramandeep Singh@ Raman Sethi, v. Amandeep Singh,

¶39

vi. Amardeep Singh, vii. Balwinder Sharma,

¶40

viii. Sukhwinder Singh@ Sukha, ix. Ja-nder Singh@ Sonu,

¶41

x. Talwinder Singh@ Laddi, xi. Gopal Kumar,

¶42

xii. Sukhwinder Singh@ Sukha, xiii. Gagandeep Singh@ Manna,

¶43

xiv. Gaurav@ Ginni, xv. Sarbpreet Singh@ Sahil

¶44

9. That therea:er the inves-ga-ng officer checked the CCTV footage of

¶45

the place of occurrence and the accused persons were iden-fied in CCTV

¶46

footage and the complainant had inden-fied the present pe--oner i.e.

¶47

JYOTI 2024.10.29 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶48

¶49

CRM-M-6467-2024

¶50

Sukhvir Singh along with other co-accused.

¶51

10. That during the inves-ga-on, it was transpired that the mo-ve of occurrence of present case, is that village of accused Vijay Kumar is situated near the village of deceased Simranjit Singh@ Simar and earlier a scuffle took place between Vijay Kumar and Simranjit @ Simar (since deceased) and in year 2019 Vijay Kumar was beaten by Simranjit @ Simar and his brother Sukhwant Singh, upon which an FIR No.20 dated 21.03.2019 u/s 307, 341, 506, 148, 149 IPC and u/s 25 ARMS Act was registered at P.S. Dhilwan at the complaint of Vijay Kumar (Co-accused). That it has also come on record that deceased Simranjit Singh had previously also beaten one person namely Sandeep Singh who was close friend of Vijay Kumar and then Sandeep Singh had got registered FIR against Simranjeet Singh vide FIR no.223 dated 29.09.2020 u/s 307, 323, 341, 506, 148, 149 IPC U/S 3, 4 SC/ST Act.

¶52

11. That accused persons in present case had enmity with the deceased and other injured-inmates, and as such the present pe--oner sharing the common inten-on with other co-accused persons have inflicted injuries on Simranjit Singh and commi�ed his murder thus present FIR was rightly registered against them.

¶53

12. That a:er comple-on of inves-ga-on final report under sec-on173 Cr.P.C. has already been presented against all the accused persons before Ld. Trial Court on 16.10.2023 and now trial is pending before Ld. Trial Court for considera-on of charge for 23.10.2024.

¶54

ROLE OF THE PRESENT PETITIONER-ACCUSED

¶55

13. That there are specific allega-ons against pe--oner and other co-accused that they in connivance with each other conspired to commit the murder of deceased Simranjit Singh and inflicted injuries on other persons, moreover pe--oner along-with other co-accused were iden-fied by complainant and their presence was seen in CCTV footage hence pe--oner does not deserve concession of regular bail thus present pe--on is liable to be dismissed.

¶56

EVIDENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER

¶57

14. That pe--oner in connivance with other co-accused by sharing common inten-on in connivance with each other has helped other co-accused in commiLng murder of deceased Simranjeet Singh and causing injuries to other inmates. It is per-nent to men-on here that presence of pe--oner was proved by complainant namely Hemant Sharma the then ASP Kapurthala Jail as he iden-fied the pe--oner from CCTV footage extracted from the spot. It is further per-nent to men-on here that from CCTV footage It is evident that pe--oner in

¶58

JYOTI 2024.10.29 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶59

¶60

CRM-M-6467-2024

¶61

connivance with other co-accused have gathered together and had come from their respec-ve barracks to the barrack of deceased Simranjit Singh which is about 300 meters away from the barracks of accused and some accused have entered the Gate at Phase-2 of Jail premises and some accused were standing guard at the Gate to obstruct forces deployed in Jail to enter said gate and helping other co-accused to flee from the gate a:er commiLng murder and a:er causing injuries to other inmates of jail. It is further per-nent to men-on here that many accused were having muffled faces and few accused were without muffled faces, moreover during the course of inves-ga-on as and when accused were iden-fied and arrested, they suffered disclosure statement with respect to involvement of other co-accused and pe--oner has ac-vely par-cipated in the commission of crime hence present pe--on is liable to be dismissed.”

¶62

There is sufficient primafacie evidence of the pe��oner's presence with the allega�ons connec�ng the pe��oner with the alleged crime, yet no injury or assault is not a?ributed to him. Given the primafacie analysis of the nature of allega�ons against the pe��oner and the other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no jus�fiability of further pre-trial incarcera�on at this stage.

¶63

The inves�ga�on indicates that the pe��oner is not the main accused, so the pe��oner's bail shall not be treated as a precedent for gran�ng bail to the other coaccused with a higher role.

¶64

Without commen�ng on the case's merits, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and for the reasons men�oned above, the pe��oner makes a case for bail. This order shall come into force from the �me it is uploaded on this Court's official webpage.

¶65

Given above, provided the pe��oner is not required in any other case, the pe��oner shall be released on bail in the FIR cap�oned above subject to furnishing bonds to the sa�sfac�on of the concerned Court and due to unavailability before any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accep�ng the surety, the concerned Court must be sa�sfied that if the accused fails to appear, such surety can produce the accused.

¶66

While furnishing a personal bond, the pe��oner shall men�on the following personal iden�fica�on details:

¶67

AADHAR number 2. Passport number (If available) and when the a?es�ng officer/court considers it appropriate or

¶68

JYOTI 2024.10.29 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶69

¶70

CRM-M-6467-2024

¶71

considers the accused a flight risk.

¶72

1. Mobile number (If available) 4. E-Mail id (If available)

¶73

This order is subject to the pe��oner’s complying with the following terms.

¶74

The pe��oner shall abide by all statutory bond condi�ons and appear before the concerned Court(s) on all dates. The pe��oner shall not tamper with the evidence, influence, browbeat, pressurize, induce, threaten, or promise, directly or indirectly, any witnesses, Police officials, or any other person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case or dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Police or the Court.

¶75

Given the background of allega�ons against the pe��oner, it becomes paramount to protect the witnesses, as well as the members of society, and incapacita�ng the accused would be one of the primary op�ons un�l the filing of the closure report or discharge, or acqui?al. Consequently, it would be appropriate to restrict the possession of firearm(s). [This restric�on is being imposed based on the preponderance of evidence of probability and not of evidence of certainty, i.e., beyond reasonable doubt; and as such, it is not to be construed as an intermediate sanc�on]. Given the nature of the allega�ons and the other circumstances peculiar to this case, the pe��oner shall surrender all weapons, firearms, and ammuni�on, if any, along with the arms license to the concerned authority within fiJeen days from release from prison and inform the Inves�gator about the compliance. However, subject to the Indian Arms Act, 1959, the pe��oner shall be en�tled to renew and take it back in case of acqui?al in this case, provided otherwise permissible in the concerned rules. Restric�ng firearms would ins�ll confidence in the vic�m(s), their families, and society; it would also restrain the accused from influencing the witnesses and repea�ng the offense.

¶76

The condi�ons men�oned above imposed by this court are to endeavor to reform and ensure the accused does not repeat the offense. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2022:INSC:735 [Para 28], Writ Pe��on (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, decided on July 20, 2022, A Three-Judge bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court holds that “The bail condi�ons imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be propor�onal to the purpose of imposing them. The courts, while imposing bail condi�ons must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, condi�ons that would result in the depriva�on of rights and liber�es must be eschewed.”

¶77

Any observa�on made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments.

¶78

JYOTI 2024.10.29 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶79

¶80

CRM-M-6467-2024

¶81

A cer�fied copy of this order would not be needed for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the Pe��oner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and a?est it to be a true copy. If the a?es�ng officer wants to verify its authen�city, such an officer can also verify its authen�city and may download and use the downloaded copy for a?es�ng bonds.

¶82