H.S.BEDI, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition for bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on behalf of Nirmal Singh, who is an accused in offences under Sections 302/34, 212, 449 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25 and 30 of the Arms Act.
(2.) THE case pertains to the murder of one Satinder Singh Sekhon on 16th July, 1994 at about 11.10 a.m. at the Dhillon petrol pump, just outside Ambala Cantt. The First Information Report was lodged by Harinder Singh brother of the deceased at 2.00 p.m., an eye-witness to the incident. In this report, the informant gave full details with regard to the manner in which the incident had taken place and also the description of the culprits. On investigation, the local police recorded the statements of various witnesses including Rajnish Dutta, another eye-witness who identified the four assassins by name as Gurdev Singh alias Gaby, Sohan Singh, Naib Singh and Vakil Singh. As per the statements of this witness, Naib Singh caught hold of Satinder Singh Sekhon, while he was sitting on a chair at the petrol pump and his co-accused Sohan Singh had given knife blows which led to his death and when a raula was raised by the witnesses, Gurdev Singh armed with a gun and Vakil Singh accused armed with a danda came out of the car, intimidated the witnesses and forced them to keep quiet. As there appeared to be some dissatisfaction with the investigation by the local police, the matter was referred to the C.B.I. on the request of the Haryana Government and on the completion of the investigation, the C.B.I. has submitted a challan against fourteen persons who are shown as accused in this case. Some of the accused moved six bail applications before the Sessions Judge, Ambala, but the same were rejected on 10th of November, 1994. It is against this order that the present petitioner Nirmal Singh who was also one of the applicants before the Sessions Judge, has come to this Court seeking bail. The primary argument of Mr. R.S. Cheema, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner was that the allegations against the petitioner were with regard to the conspiracy to commit the murder of the deceased Satinder Singh Sekhon and viewed in this background, the motive that impelled the crime, would assume importance and as the petitioner had no motive to commit the offence, his involvement in the murder was not at all proved. In support of his case, Mr. Cheema, has drawn my attention to a number of documents on record as also the statements of various witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to indicate that the hostility if at all that existed between some of the accused and the deceased did not involve the petitioner even remotely and the motive if any lay with Balkar Singh accused. He has pointedly referred to the statement of PW 49/1 a police statement of Daljit Singh, which indicates that some agreement was arrived at between Balkar Singh and the deceased on 3rd of April, 1989, with regard to the dispute pertaining to the land of the Thakur Dwara. He has also referred to the statements of PW-26 and PW-44 which are to the effect that the dispute between Balkar Singh and the deceased had been exercising the minds of the concerned persons and some efforts had been made to arrive at a settlement.
(3.) AS against this, Mr. S.K. Saxena, Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the C.B.I. has also drawn my attention to the evidence collected by the investigating agency. Primary reliance has been placed on documents D-45, D- 57 and D-60 which indicate that there was a relationship inter se between the petitioner and the deceased and that the parties had agreed at one stage that they would run the petrol pump together and share the profits as also the expenses. Mr. Saxena has further drawn my attention to the statement of Ravinder Singh Dhillon PW 4/3 to the effect that the deceased being an unemployed graduate Engineer had been given a dealership for a petrol pump and that the petitioner had undertaken to get a 'No Objection Certificate' for Sekhon from the concerned authorities and in consideration thereof, he (the petitioner Nirmal Singh) was to be given a share in the petrol pump. This statement further records that as the petitioner was unable to get the 'NOC' the deceased too had backed out of the deal and consequent thereto, the relations between the two, had got strained and Balkar Singh and his companions started to harass the deceased at the instance, of the petitioner. From a reading of the documents and the statement referred to above, it is apparent that there were business dealings between the deceased and the petitioner on account of their partnership in the petrol pump and as the deceased had allegedly backed out of his commitments, there was cause for strain in their relations and that the deceased had also expressed his apprehensions with regard to this relationship. Mr. Cheema's argument that it was Balkar Singh alone, who was the injured party will regard to the partnership, is, therefore, without merit. It is also significant that the dispute between the petitioner and the deceased which was recorded in the various documents that have been referred to above continued to simmer in the years 1989-90 but matters seem to have come to a head after March 8, 1992 when the petrol pump was actually commissioned.;