'Cryptic reasoning,' SC sets aside HC order on bail to murder accused for carrying victim to hospital

The Supreme Court has set aside the Punjab and Haryana High Court's order granting bail to two murder accused, observing that the reasoning was cryptic and merely noted that they had taken the victim to the hospital after the incident. The Court held that the trial court had rightly considered this aspect and declined to grant them relief.

A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma said the respondent-accused had been alleged to have committed the offence under Section 302 of the IPC. It may be a fact that they may have carried the injured victim, who later died, to the hospital but he was actually brought dead to the hospital. This fact will have to be considered de hors from the fact as to who actually had committed the offence in the first place in the instant case, court said. 

"In the circumstances, we find that the order of the High Court calls for interference and therefore, the same is set aside. Consequently, the order of the Sessions Court is restored," the bench said.

By the impugned order, the High Court had set aside the order of the Trial Court declining to grant regular bail to the respondents herein and consequently, had allowed the petitions for bail. An FIR was registered on March 22, 2023 under Sections 302, 323, 148, 149 (Sections 148 and 149 deleted and Sections 34, 427, 120B added later on) of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Nangal, District Rupnagar.

The said FIR was registered based on the statement given by the complainant-appellant Baljinder Singh alias Aman against accused No. 1 – Mandeep Singh alias Bhoda and accused No.2- Narinder Kumar alias Nindi.

The appellant alleged that he received a telephonic call at about 11.30 p.m. to the effect that the respondents, accompanied by 7-8 other persons, were using filthy language against the appellant and trespassed onto his land by dismantling the barbed wire fencing on his property.

He claimed that after receiving the said call, the appellant along with his driver Anil (deceased), Deepak Kumar and Chowkidar Bahadur Singh had gone to the appellant’s land at Taraf Majri in his Land Cruiser vehicle when the respondents rammed their Fortuner car into the car of the appellant. When the appellant came out from his car, accused No. 1 hit the deceased with their car and threw him down.

It was alleged that all the accused persons were armed with wooden sticks when they stepped out of their car. Accused No.1 gave a wooden stick blow on the head of the deceased whereas accused No.2 inflicted injuries to the deceased and other persons accompanying the appellant. The appellant witnessed the entire occurrence but fearing for his life, fled the scene and later discovered that the respondents took the deceased to the hospital where he was found to be dead.

The respondents were arrested in connection with FIR on March 23, 2023 and were sent to judicial custody.

The Inspector General (IG) Rupnagar Range, Rupnagar, on receipt of complaint from Dev Raj (father of accused No. 2) transferred the investigation in the present matter to Ms Darpan Ahluwalia, IPS, Assistant Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Dera Bassi, District SAS Nagar, Mohali.

A charge sheet was submitted by the SHO, Police Station Nangal before the competent court on June 20, 2023. The JMIC, Rupnagar took cognizance and the matter was committed to Additional Sessions Judge, Rupnagar for trial and adjudication. Thereafter, a supplementary charge sheet was filed on October 09, 2023 based on subsequent investigation conducted by Assistant Superintendent of Police, Dera Bassi, District SAS Nagar.

On a petition filed by the respondents under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the High Court dismissed it on July 16, 2024. However, an order was passed in interim restraining the trial court from proceeding further. This order remained in operation.

The respondents filed separate bail applications before the trial court which came to be dismissed by orders on May 21, 2024 and May 24, 2024 respectively, finding that accused No. 1 is a habitual offender as eight other criminal cases have also been registered against him and keeping in view the gravity of the offences in this case and the heinous crime alleged to have been committed by them.

The High Court, however, allowed the said applications by way of the common impugned order of November 14, 2024, thereby enlarging the respondents on bail. Being aggrieved, the appellant-complainant has preferred the instant appeal before this court.

Challenging the order, the appellant contended that the impugned order is lacking in reasons for granting relief of bail to the respondents herein inasmuch as paragraph 12 of the impugned order only records the submissions in a cryptic manner, the reasoning given in paragraphs 13 and 14 and consequently, the relief of bail was granted to the respondents herein.

He submitted that the reasons are erroneous inasmuch they do not make merit a case for grant of bail. The counsel said the respondents have been, inter alia, alleged to have committed the offence under Section 302 IPC, the manner in which the offence was committed itself is gruesome and was planned and executed in a manner which reflects that there was a criminal conspiracy amongst the accused.

The appellant said the respondents were in jail for a period of one year and eight months; the chargesheet had been filed and the supplementary chargesheet had also been filed.

His counsel said the respondents-accused have been granted the relief of bail and on the other hand, there is a stay of trial. The said orders would require interference at the hands of this court inasmuch as the respondents herein have criminal antecedents and they are not entitled to the relief of bail having regard to the manner in which the deceased was put to death.

The State counsel supported the case of the appellant-complainant herein and therefore, having regard to the merits of the case, appropriate orders may be made in these appeals.

Defending the High Courts order, the respondents counsel said the fact the accused themselves carried the deceased to the hospital and saw to it that he was given treatment immediately showed that there was no criminal intent in their mind; they further submitted that the High Court has recorded in detail the submissions of the counsel for the respective parties and has come to a right conclusion and hence there is no merit in these appeals and the same may be dismissed.

Allowing the appeal, the bench directed the respondent-accused to surrender before the Court of the Jurisdictional Magistrate or the concerned Police Station since they have been on bail pursuant to the impugned order.

Case Title: Baljinder Singh alias Aman Vs State of Punjab & Anr

Download judgment here