SUKHDEV SINGH Vs. NACHHATTAR SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the statement of Sukhdev Singh case F.I.R. No. 39 dated 18-4-1993 under Sections 302/120-B of the Indian Penal Code was registered at Police Station Baghapurana regarding the murder of Kartar Singh. As per allegations made in the First Information Report, Baljinder Singh grandson of Kartar Singh was aggrieved as Kartar Singh was propagating that wife of Baljinder Singh was having illicit relations with NachhatarSingh and Bachittar Singh. Balajinder Singh caused injuries to Kartar Singh with a kasia as a result of which Kartar Singh died. The murder was committed in pursuance of to a conspiracy hatched by Nachhatar Singh, Bachhitar Singh and Baljinder Singh. Nachhatar Singh and Bachhitar Singh was arrested in connection with the murder case and they moved an application for grant of bail. They were released on bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Faridkot vide order dated 28-5-1993 on the ground that the only evidence collected against them consisted of the statements of Gurmail Singh daughter's son of the deceased and Kuldeep Singh another grand son of the deceased who were close relatives of the deceased. Sukhdev Singh has now filed this application under Sec. 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for cancellation of the bail granted to respondents Nos. 1 and 2.

(2.) The petitioner alleged that there was clear and cogent direct evidence of conspiracy and the murder was committed by Baljinder Singh in pursuance to the conspiracy. Besides the statements of Kuldeep Singh and Gurmail Singh, there was also the statement of Ajaib Singh before whom extra judicial confession of the offence was made by the respondents. The respondents were aggressive persons and it was impossible for the witnesses to depose fearlessly at the trial if they remained free. After they were released on bail, they closed the passage leading to his field and threatened him with dire consequences. He made a complaint to the police regarding this incident and security proceedings are taken against them. The respondents were bound down under Sections 107/151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 9-7-1993.

(3.) In the return filed by the respondents the allegations made in the petition were refuted and it was alleged that complaint was lodged against them falsely with ulterior motive. In any case the dispute alleged in the complaint related to a passage and had no relevancy to the instant case. Concession of bail was rightly granted to them and they were not misusing the liberty.