SUKHPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition was filed by the petitioner for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus for securing the release of Gurdev Singh, Baljinder Singh and Pappu from the illegal custody of respondent No. 3 in Police Station Dyalpura Bhai Ka.

(2.) IT was averred in the petition that Gurdev Singh and Baljinder Singh, father and brother respectively of the petitioner and their employee Pappu were taken into illegal custody by respondent No. 3 on 3.6.2006 around 12.00 noon from the fields situated in village Dyalpura Bhai Ka. Thereafter they were taken to Police Station and beaten mercilessly. The respectables of the village went to the Police Station and saw that Gurdev Singh, who was aged 72 years, was beaten very badly and was in a bad condition. No medical aid had been given to him. Claiming that neither any FIR was registered against any of the three detenus nor they were produced before the magistrate within 24 hours, the present petition was filed by the petitioner seeking the release of the three detenus from the illegal custody of respondent No. 3 forthwith.

(3.) THE Warrant Officer, while in the company of the petitioner reached Police Station Dyalpura Bhai Ka on 4.6.2006 at 8.00 p.m., disclosed his identity to the Sentry posted there and requested him to close the main gate and not to allow anybody to come in or go out till the search was over. Another police official also reached there immediately, who disclosed his name as Sat Pal and his being posted as AMHC. The Warrant Officer requested said AMHC to provide him the Roznamcha, but he did not stop and left the Police Station. At that point of time, the petitioner pointed out towards some persons present in the barrack of the Police Station. The Warrant Officer went there and found that some persons were sitting on the cots placed in the said barrack located just adjacent to the lock-up room. They disclosed their identities as Gurdev Singh, Baljinder Singh and Pappu Kumar, the three detenus. The Warrant Officer then, in the company of the Sentry, went to the room of MHC but the Roznamcha was not found available there. On being asked by the Warrant Officer to inform the SHO, who was stated to have gone for patrolling, the Sentry took the Warrant Officer to the room of Wireless Operator, which was located in the same premises. An effort was made by the Wireless Operator to contact the SHO but he failed. The Warrant Officer then requested the Wireless Operator to inform Superintendent of Police (Headquarters) or the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bathinda but he showed his inability. Effort was made by the Warrant Officer to contact the aforementioned two officers on phone but they could not be contracted. Sometime later, SI Sarbjit Singh, SHO of Police Station, respondent No. 3 along with MHC Partap Singh reached there and were apprised by the Warrant Officer of the situation. At that point of time, AMHC Sat Pal also reached there and produced the Roznamcha while they were present out side the main gate. The Warrant Officer put his initials at Sr. No. 18, which was below last entry at Sr. No. 17. The Warrant Officer enquired from the SHO about the presence of three detenus. The SHO told him that FIR No. 60 dated 3.6.2006 under Section 447/506/34 IPC had been registered at Police Station Dyalpura against them and they have been arrested vide DDR No. 14 mentioned in the Roznamcha dated 4.6.2006 at 3.00 p.m. Both the FIR and DDR No. 14 were shown to the Warrant Officer. The Warrant Officer became apprehensive as the Roznamcha was not produced before him by the AMHC about an hour earlier. He requested the SHO to show him the case file/arrest/jamatalshi memo etc., which he expected to have been prepared by the police officer while arresting an accused but no such document was shown to him. He was, however, told that the relevant file was with one ASI Gurjant Singh, who was the investigating officer of the case and at that point of time was not present in the Police Station but on patrol duty in the Ilaqa. The Warrant Officer requested for calling the investigating officer and in spite of the message being conveyed to him, as told by the SHO, he did not reach there even after the Warrant Officer waited for a sufficient period of time i.e. more than one hour. During this time, the Warrant Officer recorded the statement of the SHO, besides a joint statement of all the three detenus in which they all stated that they were brought from their fields at 10.00 a.m. on 3.6.2006 to the Police Station and after being put in the lock-up, were given beatings. After completing other formalities, the Warrant Officer made entry in the Roznamcha at Sr. No. 19 at 9.50 p.m. and left the Police Station. However, in view of the FIR, as well as the entry regarding the arrest in respect of all the three detenus, they could not be released.