Read Time: 10 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned the plea filed by Lawrence Bishnoi's father Lawinder Kumar challenging the transit and police remand issued for the production of Bishnoi before Mansa Court in relation to the Sidhu Moose Wala murder case.

A bench of Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Abhay S Oka adjourned the matter as Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhary appearing for Bishnoi's father was not before the Court physically. Chaudhry appeared through virtual mode and informed the bench that he is in Mumbai.

Later, the counsel appearing for the State of Punjab requested the bench to direct the petitioners to serve a copy of the petition to them as well.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for the State of Punjab informed the bench that there are 57 FIRs against Bishnoi and he is being escorted by hundreds of policemen. 

However, the bench directed the matter to be listed on Monday and asked Chaudhary to appear before the court physically.

The bench was hearing a plea filed through Advocate Nikhil Jain alleging that respondents have committed illegalities by overreaching and flagrantly violating the apex court's order dated February 4, 2021, wherein the court had stayed the direction of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a plea challenging Bishnoi's arrest warrant. The High Court had passed elaborate directions for the purpose of bringing Bishnoi for investigation from Rajasthan to Chandigarh in another matter. Additionally, other petitions raising serious concerns over the threat to his life are pending before the court.

The plea submitted that the State of Punjab, Director General of Police, Punjab, and Special Investigation Team have adopted a circuitous route and resorted to illegalities by attempting to circumvent the order of the apex court.

Additionally, the plea submitted that "the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa, Punjab passed the impugned warrant of arrest in violation of the decision of this Hon'ble Court in the case of State through CBI versus Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar and Others (2000) 10 Supreme Court Cases 438wherein it has been held that a warrant of arrest cannot be issued in the aid of an ongoing investigation for the purposes of handing over custody of an accused to the investigating agency."

Furthermore, it submitted that SIT committed serious illegality by filing the application seeking permission to arrest the son of the Petitioner as such the procedure is completely alien and unknown to law.

It also alleged that the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House Court, New Delhi committed a grave and serious illegality in allowing the application for permission to arrest Bishnoi and secondly granting his transit remand to the Respondent No. 4 for being produced before the concerned court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa, Punjab on June 15, 2022.

The plea had further challenged the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's order allowing seven days of police remand of Bishnoi to the Punjab Police alleging it to be patently illegal and in violation of the principles of arrest and detention.

It submitted that "the son of the petitioner was not supplied with the grounds of arrest, a memo of arrest was not drawn out, the relatives of Lawrence Bishnoi were not informed with regard to him having been arrested. The son of the Petitioner was not allowed to be represented by an advocate of his choice and was casually remanded to police custody by way of an Order dated 15.06.2022 passed by the Ld. Magistrate in Mansa, Punjab, which lacks application of judicial mind and is, therefore, liable to be set aside and quashed."

Earlier, Advocate Sangram Singh had mentioned a matter on June 27 stating that the way in which Bishnoi was taken to Punjab was illegal. To which, the bench had said that when the murder has taken place in Mansa, then how can it be investigated by the Delhi Police.

However, the bench had listed the matter for July 11 after the counsel submitted that the interrogation should have taken place in Delhi itself and there was no need to take him to Punjab.

It may also be noted that Bhartiya Janta Party leader Jagjit Singh, who had filed a plea seeking an investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation in the Sidhu Moose Wala murder case, today informed the court that he does not wish to press the plea any further as the Punjab police is taking steps in the investigation. Counsel Namit Saxena proceeded to withdraw the plea. 

The plea stated that the removal of the security cover encouraged the assailants to immediately attack and kill Sidhu Moose Wala. The plea filed through Advocate Namit Saxena alleged, "The instant case deals with a political motive and involves inter-state and international gang rivalry which requires full scale, thorough going and comprehensive investigation."

Case Title: Lawinder Kumar Vs. State (N.C.T.) of Delhi & Ors.