KULDIP SINGH Vs. UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Kuldip Singh and Jaimal Singh, petitioners have moved the present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in complaint case No. 88/1 dated 16.9.1985 (49/1 dated 23.12.1985) under Sections 364/149, 302/149, 342/149, 325/149 IPC. The allegations against the petitioners are that they along with Dilbag Singh, Om Parkash, Jagdish Singh, Mohan Lal, and Mange Khan of Border Security Force, constable Mukhtiar Singh and constable Sukhjinder Singh hatched a criminal conspiracy to eliminate Suba Singh and in pursuance of that conspiracy, said Suba Singh was maltreated and beaten and finally his custody in an injured condition was handed over to B.S.F. people on 3.10.1984. The allegations are further that said Suba Singh was first tortured and was mercilessly beaten at the hands of the present two petitioners to the extent that his hip joint bone was fractured and in injured condition the custody of Suba Singh was handed over to B.S.F. party with the sole purpose with the sole object that the deceased may be eliminated.

(2.) IN the recent past custodial deaths have been highlighted and instances have come to the notice of law courts when the persons in uniform taking advantage of their position, had even gone to the extent of causing deaths of innocent persons. While disposing of the application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. the severity of the allegations is one of the paramount considerations which had always prevailed upon the minds of the Court besides other features such as that the accused after releasing on bail may tamper with the prosecution evidence and they may flee from the justice in order to hamper the trial. Nevertheless the law of the country is that the bail is rule and the jail is exception because the liberty of an individual is involved. Equally is the law that no person can be held guilty till a charge is proved against him beyond reasonable doubt irrespective of the fact that such culprit may enjoy a very high position in the society and may be in the uniform. In the present case no doubt allegations of the complainant Surinder Kaur are so severe that the present two petitioners along with others have been charged with a conspiracy to kill Suba Singh and in furtherance of that conspiracy they ultimately became successful. However, there is a glaring feature in this case which has to be taken note of for which the benefit of the provisions of bail has to be given to the present petitioners. As per allegations of the complainant, Suba Singh was still alive when his custody was handed over to the B.S.F. party though in an injured condition. There is not an iota of allegations that parting custody of Suba Singh to the B.S.F. party, the present two petitioners participated in the death of the deceased. During the course of arguments, it has been clearly stated by the learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 1 and 3 that members of the B.S.F. party namely Dilbag Singh, Om Parkash, Jagdish Singh, Mohan Lal and Mange Khan are already on bail. The case of the present two petitioners is being distinguished on some different pedestal such as that these two persons remained absconders for as many as 10 years and now with great difficulty these two accused are in the custody for the last about 4 months and in the event of their being released on bail, they might flee from justice and they might interfere in the prosecution evidence as one of the accused namely Kuldip Singh is still in service and is enjoying the rank of ASI. Admittedly, Jaimal Singh petitioner has since retired from the post of Superintendent of Police. The anxiety of this Court is that fair trial must proceed and this interest of the complainant can be met and secured by imposition of certain conditions. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners Shri R.S. Surjewala, has also tried to convince me under what circumstances the present two petitioners could not give their presence before the trial Court. Be that as it may, the undisputed fact is that the case of the present two petitioners in no way can be considered more severe than that of the five persons who have already been released on bail and qua them there are allegations that their acts directly route to the death of Suba Singh. In these circumstances in the view of this Court it is a fit case where both the petitioners should be released on bail.

(3.) NOTHING stated above shall amount to an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. <OP>Trainee1</OP>