Daljit Singh Rajput, Advocate vs State of Punjab

A.P. Chowdhari, J

This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been moved by Mr. Daljit Singh Rajput, Advocate, Moga.

The substance of the averments made by the petitioner in the petition is that there is political rivalry between him and Sathi Roop Lal against whom he fought two elections in 1991 and 1993. The latter''s son Vijay Kumar Sathi is a sitting M.L.A. in the Punjab Legislature. They have one B.M. Modi also in their faction. Apart from political rivalry with the aforesaid, there are disputes going on between the petitioner on the one hand and certain office bearers of one Ayurvedic College and Hospital, Moga. The petitioner is General Secretary of the said College and Hospital, while B.M. Modi referred to above also claims to be its General Secretary. Various cases are going on between the two factions referred to above. The petitioner further averred that the opposite party was bent upon involving the petitioner in some false case of a serious nature in collusion with the police. The petitioner filed Crl. Misc. No.12471M of 1992 under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in which by order dated January, 27, 1993, a learned Judge of this Court directed that the petitioner shall not be arrested in any case without permission of this Court. Apart from five cases mentioned at serial Nos. (i) to (v) in the reply filed by Shri K.B. Singh, Superintendent of Police (HQrs) Faridkot in this petition, three more cases were registered against the petitioner after January, 1993. These are at various stages of investigation. The last case is FIR No. 61 dated August 2, 1993, under Section 376 of the Indian penal Code, at Police Station Sadar Moga. In view of the order of blanket bail dated January 27, 1993, referred to above, the State moved Crl. Misc. No. 9372M of 1993 seeking permission of this Court to arrest the petitioner in case FIR No. 61 dated August 2, 1993, under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. On behalf of the petitioner, Crl. Misc. No. 9490M of 1993 for the grant of anticipatory bail in the said case under Section 376 Indian penal Code was moved. Both these petitions were disposed of by a learned Single Judge of this Court by orders dated August 20, 1993. The application made by the State for permission to arrest the petitioner was allowed. Application for anticipatory bail moved by the petitioner was dismissed. Copies of orders are annexures P8 and P9 filed with the petition and Annexures R1 and R2 filed with the aforesaid reply. Against the dismissal of application for anticipatory bail, the petitioner filed SLP (Crl.) No. 1721 of 1993, in which notice was issued to the State and thereafter the said SLP was dismissed by their Lordships of the Supreme Court on September 14, 1993.

Coming back to the averments in the petition, it has been stated that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the case under Section 376 of the Indian Penal code, and there were telltale circumstances showing the false involvement of the petitioner in that case. In the above background, the petitioner apprehended that he would be `liquidated'' by the police of Faridkot district. He has, therefore, prayed that he may be allowed to surrender in this Court an ordered to be kept at Model Jail, Burail till such time that he gets bail. He has further prayed that interrogation (sic) of the case against him may be carried out inside the said jail.

Notice of the application was served on the AdvocateGeneral, Punjab, and Mr. S.S. Saron, Deputy AdvocateGeneral, Punjab, who was present in Court accepted the same. The petitioner was allowed to surrender as prayed for by him on September 20, 1993, and he was ordered to be sent to judicial custody at Chandigarh. It was expressly made clear that the said order was being passed at the request of the petitioner himself and the same would not prejudice claim of the State for a remand to police custody, which might be made at later stage. The case was adjourned until today at the request of Mr. S.C. Sibal, Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, on account of his personal difficulties. In the meanwhile reply has also been filed on behalf the State.

I have heard learned counsel for both the parties.

Mr. S.C. Sibal contended that for purposes of remand it was not always necessary to produce the accused before the Magistrate. for the purposes of remand, therefore, it was not necessary to send the accused to Moga. He further submitted that this Court being a common High Court for the States of Punjab, Haryana and Union Territory of Chandigarh it is perfectly possible to transfer the case itself from the State of Punjab to the Union Territory of Chandigarh. Further submission of Mr. Sibal is that transfer of case includes a case under investigation. Learned counsel further contended that the aim of the police of district Faridkot was to arrest the petitioner and humiliate him in the eyes of the public. He laid considerable emphasis on the facts and circumstances of the rape case, in which the petitioner had been involved, in an effort to show that it was an act of vindictiveness and nothing else. It was further submitted by Mr. Sibal that the police had already recovered the pistol from one Mr. B.S. Bhatti, M.L.A. who, according to the first information report, had allegedly committed certain offences in relation to another lady named Kulwant Kaur. In other words, recovery of the pistol from the present petitioner was no more a live issue.

On behalf of the State, it was strenuously contended that the settled law is that the Court does not as a rule interfere in the working of the police in so far as the stage of investigation is concerned Reference was made to several authorities in this behalf. It was vehemently contended that the litigation was mostly between different individuals and there was nothing to show that at any stage the police had acted illegally or unfairly towards the petitioner. Mr Saron, learned DAG Punjab, further argued that it would be setting a nottoogood precedent and may be suggestive of lack of faith in the entire police set of the district in its working according to law if the case is transferred at this stage from Moga, district Faridkot, to Chandigarh. No such case had been made out. Mr. Saron further submitted that the police would act according to law and it would be ensured that the petitioner is not humiliated and harassed. Mr. Saron further submitted that a separate case stands registered at Police Station Dharmkot and according to his instructions no pistol had so far been recovered in this case. He further invited my attention to the averment made in SLP before the Supreme Court by the petitioner that Kulwant Kaur about whose murder there is a reference in the first information report in question was still alive. this aspect apart from the other matters arising out of the first information report had to the clarified during interrogation.

It have given my anxious consideration to the respective submissions of the learned counsel.

I may be stated at once that I am not concerned with merits of the case under Section 376 IPC at this stage. In due course the question will be decided whether what is stated in the first information report is true or not. A perusal of the various cases referred to by both the parties shows that mostly those cases are between two factions claiming to be officebearers in relation to the Ayurvedic College and Hospital, Moga. In one of the cases under TADA, the charges under that Act were dropped on legal advice tendered by the District Attorney, which broadly indicates that there is nothing personal against the petitioner as far as the State is concerned. Another feature which must be taken note of is that transferring the case at this stage would be setting a wrong precedent. Such a course may be justified in the rarest of rare cases. I do not find the present case to be of that category. The order passed by this Court permitting the police to arrest in spite of the blanket bail granted earlier has become final upto the Supreme Court. Arrest and interrogation by the police according to law must follow as a natural consequence. In my view, the legitimate rights of the petitioner can be safeguarded by issuing directions Accordingly, it is directed :

(i) The petitioner shall be produced before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, tomorrow or as soon thereafter as possible when it will be open to the State of Punjab to make an application for remand of the accused to police custody. The learned Magistrate will pass appropriate orders on that application according to law and in the light of this order.

(ii) In pursuance of the remand to police custody, it will be open to the Investigating Officer to remove the petitioner to Moga and such other places as may be necessary in connection with the investigation. Further action will be taken by the Investigating Officer in relation to the petitioner according to law.

(iii) Before granting remand on the application of the State of Punjab, the Chief Judicial Magistrate shall have the petitioner medically examined and place MLA (MLR) on record of his file and hand over one copy thereof to the Investigating Officer.

(iv) The petitioner shall not be paraded in any public place at Moga or at any other town except that he shall be directly taken in a vehicle and produced in the Court concerned as and when the same is required.

A copy of this order be given free of cost at once both to the Deputy AdvocateGeneral, Punjab, as well as counsel for the petitioner. A copy of it also sent for information and compliance to the Chief Judicial Magistrate Chandigarh.