TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Don't Miss
Advertisement

High Court puts CBI, Punjab on notice in ‘fake encounter case’

Petitioners have submitted that they have no faith in police-led inquiry
Photo for representational purpose only. iStock

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday put the State of Punjab and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on notice on a petition filed by a couple seeking a time-bound CBI probe under the court’s supervision into their 22-year-old son’s “fake encounter” after being “falsely implicated” in a kidnapping case

Advertisement

In their petition placed before Justice Sanjiv Berry’s Bench, petitioners Baljit Kaur and Lakhwinder Singh, through counsel Navkiran Singh, contended that their son Jaspreet Singh was a student living in Canada since October 2022. Recently married, he returned to India only days before he was killed in a police encounter on March 13 in the area of Nabha police station.

Advertisement

According to the plea, Jaspreet was accused of kidnapping a seven-year-old child of a distant relative, leading to registration of an FIR. It was claimed that a police party followed a white vehicle believed to be carrying the kidnapped child. Upon being signalled to stop, the vehicle allegedly sped away, leading to a chase and an encounter in which Jaspreet Singh was shot and two police personnel were injured.

Navkiran Singh stated on the petitioners’ behalf that the post-mortem report dated March 14 revealed seven bullet injuries on Jaspreet’s body, including three with “tattooing” – a sign of close-range firing. One of the injuries, bearing tattooing, was located on the forehead, indicating the youth was shot at point-blank range.

The plea further alleged that the police officials involved were lauded by their superiors and reportedly rewarded with promotions and monetary incentives as per a news-report, instead of being subjected to accountability. The petitioners submitted that they had no faith in a police-led inquiry, especially when the very force involved in the alleged staged encounter was in charge of the investigation.

Advertisement

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement