'Unholy political nexus', Punjab and Haryana High Court turns down bail of four

Tribune News Service

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, January 12

More than eight years after a youngster was murdered, the Punjab and Haryana High Court recently turned down bail plea of four accused in the case. Justice Ashok Kumar Verma passed the order after taking into consideration, among other things, “the apprehension of justice being thwarted by the grant of bail to the accused because of unholy political nexus having the highest echelons of power”.

The High Court had ordered re-investigation after the three co-accused were acquitted, despite a stay order.

Justice Verma’s Bench was told by the complainant’s counsel that his son was murdered at the hands of the petitioners, along with the co-accused, one of whom happened to be a police officer and posted as a SHO in the same area, while others were the “henchmen” of a local politician.

Dismissing the pleas of Balbir Singh and others, Justice Verma observed an FIR for murder and other offences was registered on October 12, 2014, under Sections 302, 148, 149 and 120-B of the IPC at Sarhali police station in Tarn Taran district.

The petitioners were specifically named in the FIR. But the police did not conduct a fair investigation under political patronage enjoyed by the accused, following which the complainant approached the HC. The petition was disposed of in September 2016 by directing the Punjab IG, Crime, to look into the matter. The complainant again approached the court when “even then no investigation took place”.

The Bench in July 2018 issued directions to the state for ensuring free and fair investigation, with further directions to stay the trial court proceedings. In spite of the stay order, the trial court in August 2018 acquitted the co-accused.

Justice Verma added the court ordered re-investigation since the facts shocked its conscience. It was of the opinion that the investigating agency had failed to perform its duties, leading to the acquittal. The state re-investigated the matter and filed supplementary challan. The acquitted co-accused and the petitioners were found guilty. Yet, the state refused to summon the acquitted co-accused. The complainant’s application to summon them was dismissed by the trial court, after which he approached the HC again.

Justice Verma added he did not find any trigger point warranting interference to grant regular bail after applying the law laid down by the Supreme Court to the “glaring peculiar facts and circumstances of the case”.

About The Author

Tribune News Service

The Tribune News Service brings you the latest news, analysis and insights from the region, India and around the world. Follow the Tribune News Service for a wide-ranging coverage of events as they unfold, with perspective and clarity.

Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.