Balbir Singh vs State of Haryana

K.S. Kumaran, J.

The petitioners in these two bail applications namely, Balbir Singh and Hem Raj are the coaccused in FIR No. 188 dated 2.2.1997 of Police Station Sadar, Karnal registered under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. Therefore I am disposing of these two applications by this common order.

The F.I.R. has been registered on the basis of the statement of Amarjit Kaur wife of Surjit Singh. The said Amarjit Kaur is the sister of Amrik Singh, who according to F.I.R., has been killed by the Balbir Singh, Hem Raj (petitioners herein) and Mohini (Nonapplicant). In the F.I.R. it has been stated as follows.

Amrit Singh (deceased) went to America and later came into contact with the petitionerBalbir Singh alias Kulbir Singh, who was a travelling agent. PetitionerBalbir Singh took Amrik Singh (deceased) to Columbia, but Balbir Singh returned to Delhi after two months. PetitionersBalbir Singh and Hem Raj along with Mohini started sending people from India, while Amrik Singh (deceased) was settling them there. Amrik Singh (deceased) used to telephone his sister Amarjit Kaur at times through the telephone installed in the house of the Sarpanch of their village who is also known as Amrik Singh. On 10.9.1995, Sarpanch Amrik Singh informed Amarjit Kaur that her brother Amrik Singh (deceased) will reach Delhi from Columbia on 13.9.1995 and that she and her husband Surjit Singh should reach Delhi to receive him. On the same evening, another telephone call came from Amrik Singh (deceased) at the house of Sarpanch that Amarjit Kaur and Surjit Singh should not come to Delhi since petitioner Balbir Singh, Balbir Singh''s brotherinlaw Mohini, and petitioner Hem Raj were reaching there to receive him. When Amrik Singh (deceased) did not reach on 13.9.1995, Amarjit Kaur became worried. On 16.9.1995, petitioners Hem Raj, Balbir Singh and the above said Mohini came to her native place Ghanola and gave her Rs. 20,000/ in cash and two watches. When Amarjit Kaur enquired as to why her brother had not come, she was informed that he has been sent back to Columbia and will arrive soon. On 29.5.1996, Amarjit Kaur received a letter which was illegible and written in Spanish language. After 78 months, police from Anandpur Sahib came to the residence of Amarjit Kaur and told her that petitioners Balbir Singh, Hem Raj and the said Mohini have murdered her brother Amrik Singh. Then Amarjit Kaur started searching for her brother Amrik Singh and went to Chander Palace Hotel, Paharganj, Delhi where the owner of the hotel informed that on 13.9.1995, petitioners Balbir Singh, Hem Raj and the said Mohini had visited his hotel along with Amrik Singh and stayed there for a while; that during their stay, there was hot discussion over the settlement of accounts; that thereafter all the four left in a Maruti car; that on the next day, Balbir Singh, Hem Raj and Mohini came back, and that when he asked them as to the whereabouts of Amrik Singh, they said that they had sent him back to Columbia and U.S.A. When the Punjab Police did not register the case, Amarjit Kaur filed petition before the High Court and the High Court directed the Police Station, Karnal to register the case.

The petitioners moved an application each for bail before the learned Sessions Judge, Karnal which was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge. That is why the petitioners have filed these petitions.

The petitioners contend that there is no evidence whatsoever to prove that Amrik Singh had come to India or that he has been killed, that too, by the petitioners. The petitioners also contend that though the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 21.8.1997 gave three weeks'' time to the police to verify whether Amrik Singh had come to India on or about 13.9.1995, the same fact could not be verified. According to them, the entries in the record of the hotel at Delhi are false. According to the petitioners, in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 16409 of 1996 filed by Amarjit Kaur for directing the police to register the F.I.R., the police had stated in their reply that no dead body was recovered in the area of Karnal G.T. Road, that no case of unidentified dead body had been found by the Police Stations of Gharaunda, City Karnal, Sadar Karnal and Butana. The petitioners contend that in the preliminary objections, it has also been stated that the facts mentioned in the confessional statement of petitioner Hem Raj could not be proved as correct.

I have heard the counsel for both the sides including the counsel for the complainant. It is, of course, seen that the investigating agency has not placed any material obtained either from the Airport authorities or from the concerned Airlines Company to show that Amrik Singh (deceased) came to India on 13.9.1995. There is also no material to show that his deadbody or any other unidentified deadbody with fire arm injury was found during the relevant period i.e. on or about 13.9.1995. But as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the respondents, it appears from the prosecution case that Amrik Singh (deceased), petitioners Balbir Singh and Hem Raj and Mohini were doing the business of sending people from India to other countries and settling them there. As contended by the learned counsel for the respondents, it could be that Amrik Singh (deceased) had come to India but under a different name also. This is a matter which will have to be brought out in evidence at the time of the trial. Similarly the fact that no deadbody was found, also, cannot go against the prosecution.

We have the statement of the partner of the Chander Palace Hotel, namely, Joginder Singh under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (annexure R2). He has stated that Amrik Singh (deceased) used to stay in his hotel, that Amrik Singh (deceased) and petitioner Balbir Singh used to work as travelling agents and, therefore, he knew them. Joginder Singh has further stated that Amrik Singh (deceased) had gone to Columbia and petitioners Balbir Singh and Hem Raj and the above said Mohini used to work as agents for sending people from India to other countries while, Amrik Singh (deceased) used to settle them there. Joginder Singh has further stated that on 13.9.1995, Amrik Singh (deceased) had come from Columbia and on 14.9.1995, petitioners Balbir Singh and Hem Raj along with Mohini and Amrik Singh (deceased) came from the Airport, stayed in his hotel for some time and then went out. His further statement is that Amrik Singh (deceased) told him that a sum of Rs. 25 lacs is due to him from petitioner Balbir Singh, and that Balbir Singh is not paying the same. Joginder Singh has further stated that petitioners Balbir Singh and Hem Raj, and the said Mohini assured that the amount would be paid, and that they went to U.P. According to the statement of Joginder Singh, on the next day i.e. 15.9.1995, the petitioners Balbir Singh and Hem Raj and the said Mohini came back, and when he asked about the whereabouts of Amrik Singh, they informed him that he had gone to America. According to the statement of Joginder Singh, the room in his hotel was booked in the name of Hem Raj.

The statement of Joginder Singh shows that Amrik Singh (deceased) had come from Columbia and was seen last in the company of petitioners and Mohini by Joginder Singh and also that there was some talk about the settlement of accounts. The statement of Joginder Singh is not to be scrutinised very closely since at this stage, I am concerned with the question whether the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail or not. In the circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the statement of Joginder Singh prima facie shows that Amrik Singh (deceased) had come on 13.9.1995 and was last seen by him in the company of petitioners and Mohini.

The prosecution also relied upon the statement of one Sher Singh recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. by the Police (annexure R3). His statement is that the petitioners Balbir Singh and Hem Raj came to him on 7.7.1997 and confessed to him that Balbir Singh had killed Amrik Singh (deceased) with a pistol shot. Of course, the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that it is clear from the statement of Sher Singh that himself and the petitioners did not know each other, that he had no connection whatsoever with them and, therefore, there was absolutely no need for the petitioners to have made any confession to him. He also pointed out that though the petitioners had allegedly requested Sher Singh to take them to the police, and though Sher Singh had taken them to the Police Station Sadar, Karnal and had gone inside leaving them at the gate, the petitioners are alleged to have gone away from there, when Sher Singh had come back after enquiring whether the S.H.O. was there or not. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that this statement of Sher Singh is, therefore, unreliable. But even leaving aside the statement of Sher Singh, as pointed out already, we have the statement of Joginder Singh who had seen the petitioners and Mohini lastly in the company of Amrik Singh (deceased). Amrik Singh (deceased) had not contacted his sister, the complainant Amarjit Kaur after 1995, which he would have normally done since his parents are no more. Normally, he would have contacted his sister had he been alive and would not have remained without contacting her from 1995 onwards. Therefore, if we take into consideration the statement of Joginder Singh, and the fact that Amrik Singh (deceased) had not contacted his sister till now, it can be, for the present purpose, assumed that Amrik Singh (deceased) is no more and that he was last seen in the company of the petitioners and Mohini.

The prosecution relied upon confession made by the petitioner Hem Raj. He has stated therein that petitioner Balbir Singh killed Amrik Singh (deceased) with his pistol. Of course, it is an exculpatory statement of a coaccused who has involved the other accused while vindicating himself. He has stated therein that he even objected to the idea of killing Amrik Singh (deceased). Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that no reliance can be placed upon his statement.

But whatever it is, in view of the statement of Joginder Singh, the partner of the hotel, and the other circumstances pointed out by me, I am of the opinion that petitioner Balbir Singh is not entitled to the relief of bail.

But so far as the petitioner Hem Raj is concerned, though the room in the hotel was booked in his name and though he was also last seen in the company of Amrik Singh (deceased) along with the other accused, there is no evidence against him as matter stands now. It may be that he was in the company of the other accused, but that alone will not show that he is also guilty. The materials placed on record do not indicate that he is involved in the crime. Therefore, I am of the opinion that petitioner Hem Raj is entitled to the relief of bail. He is ordered to be released on bail by subjecting him to severe conditions till the trial of this case is over. Petitioner Hem Raj shall remain and reside in City Kurukshetra and shall not leave the same without the permission of this Court, except for the purpose of attending the hearings of this case in the court concerned. He shall not leave India without the permission of this Court. He shall surrender his passport, if he has any, to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal. If he does not hold a passport, he should file an affidavit to the effect before the learned C.J.M., Karnal, and he shall surrender the passport before the learned C.J.M., Karnal, if he acquires any in the future, till the disposal of the case by the trial Court. He shall also report and sign before the learned C.J.M., Karnal daily at 10 a.m. on all working days except when he is attending the hearings of this case in the court concerned.

Cr.M. 23193M/97 :

In view of discussion above, this petition filed by Balbir Singh is dismissed.

Cr.M. 25835M/97 :

This petition filed by Hem Raj is allowed and he is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 50,000/ with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Karnal, subject to the above mentioned conditions.