SC sets aside Delhi HC order staying discharge of J-K Sikh leader in murder case

Advertisement

“It is only in rare and exceptional cases where the order of discharge is ex-facie perverse that the revisional court (high court) can take the extreme step of staying that order. However, such an order should be passed only after giving an opportunity of being heard to the accused. Moreover, while granting the stay, the Court must mould the relief so that the trial does not proceed against the discharged accused,” said a Bench led by Justice AS Oka.

“If the trial against a discharged accused proceeds, even before the revision application against an order of discharge is decided, the final outcome of the revision will become fait accompli,” the bench added.

The Supreme Court quashed the Delhi High Court’s orders from October 21, 2023, and November 4, 2023, and directed the High Court to decide the prosecution’s revision application impartially, without being influenced by any observations made in this judgment. The top court also gave the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi and the prosecution the option to apply to the high court for priority in the disposal of the revision application.

Sudershan Singh Wazir was arrested by Delhi Police in February 2023, in connection with the murder of former National Conference leader Trilochan Singh Wazir, who was also the former chairman of the J&K Gurudwara Prabhandak Committee, in September 2021. Wazir and two other accused were discharged by the trial court on October 20, 2023, while murder charges were framed against another accused, Harmeet Singh. However, the Delhi High Court had asked Wazir to surrender, stating he could not avail himself of the benefit of the discharge order.

The Supreme Court had expressed shock over the Delhi High Court's order staying the trial court’s discharge order. “How can an order of discharge be stayed? It is completely unheard of. Absolute shocking affairs! If the Court will start staying the order of discharge, then trial will proceed. How can this happen? We will have to lay down the law in view of the manner in which power is exercised by the High Court,” the Bench had said. The court stayed the High Court’s order requiring Wazir, the chairman of the Jammu and Kashmir Sikh United Front, to surrender and also stayed the trial proceedings against him.

The Delhi High Court had previously noted that in the peculiar circumstances of this case, the state was unaware that, before the revision was listed before the Supreme Court, Wazir had already been granted bail. It emphasised that the State could not be precluded from filing an application under Section 390 Cr.P.C. for his re-arrest, as there is no limitation in the provision for such a plea. The essence of Section 390, the high court said, is the exercise of discretion by the High Court to commit an accused back to prison if deemed necessary.