Vinod Kumar vs State Of Punjab

Gurvinder Singh Gill, J

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered against him vide FIR No.218 dated 16.7.2021 at Police Station Jandiala, Amritsar Rural under Sections 304, 34 and 201 of IPC.

At the time of issuance of notice of motion on 16.8.2021 the following order was passed:

"The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.218 dated 16.7.2021 at Police Station Jandiala, Amritsar Rural under Sections 304, 34 and 201 of Indian Penal Code.

The matter pertains to an incident, which took place on 8.12.2020 regarding which FIR came to be lodged on 16.7.2021 pursuant to intervention by this Court.

One Inderjit died on 8.12.2020 an unnatural death and the post mortem report revealed that he had sustained as many as 14 injuries including firearm shots.

Since no FIR was registered for about 3 months, brother of deceased namely Maninderpal filed a petition i.e. CWP-5422 of 2021 for issuance of directions for the same, wherein an order dated 18.3.2021 was passed directing Inspector General of Police, Border Range, Amritsar to conduct an inquiry, while also directing the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Amritsar-I to conduct a judicial inquiry.

The Inspector General of Police, Border Range, Amritsar, upon conducting inquiry, reported that the deceased Inderjit on 8.12.2020, while under the influence of liquor and morphine (as per Viscera Examination Report) snatched a Fortuner vehicle bearing registration No.HR-01-AE-6600 from one Dr. Sanjay Aggarwal in Ambala. While drving the same at extremely high speed, he broke through the Toll barrier at Shambhu, which is stated to be recorded in the CCTV camera installed there. It is further reported that thereafter the deceased, while driving the snatched vehicle, did not even stop at the barricades at Bidhipur in the area of Police Station Maqsooda, District Jalandhar Rural, and dashed through the barricades. Since information had already been flashed to the police in the State, barricading was held short of Nijjerpura Toll Plaza (near Amritsar) but deceased rammed into the same, upon which CIA staff members namely ASI Vinod Kumar (petitioner) and ASI Darshan Singh fired hitting the deceased. The vehicle thereafter stopped at the second barricade. Since Inderjit had been injured, he was rushed to hospital but he could not survive. It is thus reported that the death occurred on account of excessive force used by the police officials and that they did not have any intention to kill Inderjit. To a similar effect is the report of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Amritsar-I.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is a case where the deceased was in a state of intoxication and was drunk and was driving the vehicle rashly and apparently was a desperate kind of person inasmuch as he had rammed into all the Tolls barriers and barricading raised in between Ambala and Amritsar as is also recorded in CCTV footage and has otherwise been reported.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the aforesaid version cannot be said to be an after thought inasmuch as Dr. Sanjay Aggarwal had lodged an FIR on 8.12.2020 itself regarding snatching of the vehicle and infact even the police officials, who were manning the barricades, had also lodged DDR. Learned counsel has submitted that keeping in view the conduct of the deceased and the fact that the police officials at Nijjerpura Toll Plaza had prior information about the said conduct of the deceased that he was going ramming into Toll barriers and barricades, the petitioner had to take the extreme step of firing in order to avoid a bigger loss, which could have been caused in case the deceased went on driving his vehicle rashly and could have even killed several persons while doing so.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that, in any case, even as per the inquiry report the petitioner never nursed any intention to kill the deceased and had no enmity of any sort and whatever action they had taken, they had taken in good faith in discharge of their official duties.

Notice of motion for 22.11.2021.

Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C."

Learned State counsel, upon instructions from SI Tarsem Singh has informed that pursuant to interim directions, the petitioner has since joined investigation and is not required for any custodial interrogation.

Learned counsel representing the complainant has however, vehemently opposed the petition on the ground that infact the deceased was killed intentionally in an encounter and there are several unexplained circumstances which would clearly show that the story as putforth by the petitioner regarding barging into barricades and being under influence of some intoxicant is absolutely false. Learned counsel for complainant has submitted that the deceased had a clean record and there was no occasion for him to run away from the police or to barge into any barricades. Learned Senior counsel has also submitted that in fact in the inquiry conducted by Inspector General of Police, the findings have been returned against the police officials to the effect that police had used excessive force to stop the deceased and it was on the basis of said inquiry the FIR came to be lodged.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.

The sequence of the events as unfolded regarding snatching of an Fortuner vehicle from Ambala and the snatcher having gone upto Amritsar while crashing into several barricades raised on the way which is also stated to have been recorded in CCTV cameras would leave many questions to be answered on part of the complainant. The Inspector General of Police (Border Range) who had conducted inquiry has reported that as per Viscera examination report the deceased was under influence of liquor and morphine. It has also been reported that police had used excessive force in stopping deceased who was driving the snatched Fortuner vehicle. The precise question as to whether the force used was excessive or was justified in view of conduct of deceased immediately before the spot of occurrence inasmuch as he is alleged to have rammed into barricades would be a debatable question. In any case, at this stage this Court would not like to delve deep into these finer details which can be taken care of during investigation or during trial. Since the petitioner is stated to have joined investigation and is not required for any custodial interrogation, the petition is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 16.8.2021 are hereby made absolute subject to the condition that the petitioner shall join investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.