Devi Lal vs State of Haryana

Madan Mohan Punchhi, J. (Oral)

These are two cross petitions being Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 3669M and 3826M of 1986 which can be disposed of by a common order.

Trouble seemed to be brewing upon the premises of the Truck Union, Sirsa. Contenders to the office of the Union were Devil Lal and his companions on one side and Dharam pal Khanna and his companions on the other. It seems that the police had prior information about the expected trouble. A number of police men were present at the spot persuading the two parties to keep claim. However, trouble erupted and firing was reported to, Two men died at the spot and five others were injured. One of them died later in the hospital. It turns out to be that two men, namely, Dev Singh and Harbhajan Singh died from the group of Dharam pal Khanna and Maru Ram died from the group of Devi Lal. A.S.I. Amrik Singh was one of the injured persons. The First Information Report was given by Suresh Chand, Head Constable in which not many details were given by him as to the actual occurrence. However, he was able to say that, to begin with, Devi Lal, petitioner in Criminal Misc. No. 3669M of 1986, was empty handed. At the same time, the name of Ajit Singh, petitioner in Criminal Misc. No. 3826M of 1986, was conspicuously missing therein as a participator.

It appears that, during investigation, the police recorded statements of witnesses of both factions and thus came to categorize Devi Lal to be one who used a gun to kill Dev Singh and then the same gun was taken over by his coaccused Darbara Singh to kill Harbhajan Singh. In the same way, Maru Ram was said to have been killed by Balbir Singh, coaccused to Ajit Singh petitioner, and the latter responsible for gunfire shorts on Devi Lal in an attempt to murder him.

It also stands admitted that the Court of Sessions granted bail to seven persons on the side of Devi Lal petitioner and four persons on the side of Ajit Singh petitioner. Devi Lal and Darbara Singh, accused, stand incarcerated on one side and Ajit Singh and balbir Singh stand incarcerated on the other. The preset twin effort is that both the aforesaid petitioner be released on bail on the premises that Devi Lal was specifically mentioned in the FIR to be empty handed and the name of Ajit Singh was conspicuously absent thereform. Later investigation was termed by both sides to be improvements made by the respective factions to spread the net wide.

It seems to me that if these pleas are adverted to and opined upon at the present stage, that would virtually be deciding the case. The First Information Report is not the encyclopedia of all the details of the crime. In the nature of things, details had to be gathered by the investigation later. Suresh Chand Head Constable was one of the few police officials who had to be on the spot to prevent any untoward happening. It cannot be said, for the present, that his perception was highly sharp as to gather all the details of the occurrence which he was supposedly required to bring forth in the F.I.R. Same can be said about the other police officers present who were not categoric in details about the occurrence in their statements under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Only the factional eye witnesses were. The comment thus that the net has been spread wide does not, in the circumstance, seem to me, for the present, valid the parties cannot treat the incident a mutually private affair.

Therefore, for the above reasons, i decline bail to both the petitioners.

Petitions dismissed.