BABLU KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer in this petition is to release the petitioners on regular bail in FIR No. 236 dated 22.10.2004 under Section 302/120-B IPC, registered at PS Kharar, District Ropar.

(2.) THE aforesaid FIR was registered on a statement made by Rupinder Singh wherein he has stated that he had taken 5 acres of land on contract basis in village Chhaparchiri and had employed Surat Lala - a Nepali, to look after the cultivation. Said Surat Lal used to stay in the fields only. The complainant received a telephonic call from one Major Teja Singh of Village Chhaparchiri, who informed that Surat Lal had been murdered and his dead body was thrown in the bushes. Thereafter the complainant reached at the spot and saw that some unknown persons had inflicted injuries with sharp edged weapons, on various parts of deceased Surat Lal. On 24.10.2004, one Gagandeep Singh son of Bhupinder Singh made a statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., to the effect that on 20.10.2004 he went to the house of Harnek Singh, Lambardar at about 6 p.m., as he was looking for a servant and he had came to know that some persons (Bhaiyyas) who has come from Bihar were there in the village. When he did not find Harnek Singh at his home, he went to his tubewell and on the way he saw 7-8 persons from Bihar sitting and talking to each other that "Nepali will not give our money back and will rather swear falsely on Dussehra, therefore, we should finish him before Dussehra and this will be done by Bablu and Lallan Shah and the remaining others will save them."

(3.) IN support of the prayer made in his petition, learned counsel for the petitioner states that (i) it is a case of clueless murder in which the prosecution has failed to collect even circumstantial evidence which could link the petitioners with the alleged occurrence; (ii) there is no last seen evidence gathered by the prosecution; (iii) investigation has been completed, challan has been presented and charges have also been framed; (iv) the petitioners have been implicated on the basis of a statement made under Section 161 Cr.P.C., by one Gagandeep Singh, who has since been examined as a prosecution witness on 18.10.2005; (v) according to learned counsel as per the deposition of Gagandeep Singh, a photocopy of which has been shown to the court, no case is made out against the petitioners; (vi) since the prosecution intends to examine as may as 18 witnesses, conclusion of trial will take a considerably long period; (vii) petitioners are in custody for the last more than one year.