‘Unholy political nexus’, courtroom turns  down bail of 4

‘Unholy political nexus’, courtroom turns down bail of 4

Tribune Information Service

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, January 12

Greater than eight years after a teen was murdered, the Punjab and Haryana Excessive Courtroom not too long ago turned down bail plea of 4 accused within the case. Justice Ashok Kumar Verma handed the order after considering, amongst different issues, “the apprehension of justice being thwarted by the grant of bail to the accused due to unholy political nexus having the best echelons of energy”.

The Excessive Courtroom had ordered re-investigation after the three co-accused had been acquitted, regardless of a keep order.

Justice Verma’s Bench was advised by the complainant’s counsel that his son was murdered by the hands of the petitioners, together with the co-accused, certainly one of whom occurred to be a police officer and posted as a SHO in the identical space, whereas others had been the “henchmen” of an area politician.

Dismissing the pleas of Balbir Singh and others, Justice Verma noticed an FIR for homicide and different offences was registered on October 12, 2014, underneath Sections 302, 148, 149 and 120-B of the IPC at Sarhali police station in Tarn Taran


The petitioners had been particularly named within the FIR. However the police didn’t conduct a good investigation underneath political patronage loved 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 once more approached the courtroom when “even then no investigation happened”.

The Bench in July 2018 issued instructions to the state for guaranteeing free and truthful investigation, with additional instructions to remain the trial courtroom proceedings. Despite the keep order, the trial courtroom in August 2018 acquitted the co-accused.

Justice Verma added the courtroom ordered re-investigation because the info shocked its conscience. It was of the opinion that the investigating company had did not carry out its duties, resulting in the acquittal. The state re-investigated the matter and filed supplementary challan. The acquitted co-accused and the petitioners had been discovered responsible. But, the state refused to summon the acquitted co-accused. The complainant’s utility to summon them was dismissed by the trial courtroom, after which he approached the HC once more.

Justice Verma added he didn’t discover any set off level warranting interference to grant common bail after making use of the legislation laid down by the Supreme Courtroom to the “obtrusive peculiar info and circumstances of the case”.

Supply hyperlink

Leave comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *.

%d bloggers like this: