SC grants anticipatory bail to Punjab’s ex-DGP in 29-year-old custodial death case

The Supreme Court on Thursday granted safety from arrest to Punjab’s former Director General of Police (DGP) Sumedh Singh Saini in a case of homicide lodged towards him in August 2020 for an alleged custodial demise 29 years in the past.

Saini who retired in 2018, had approached the highest court docket looking for safety after the trial court docket in Chandigarh and the Punjab and Haryana High Court on September eight refused to just accept his plea of political witch hunt by the current Punjab authorities and declined him anticipatory bail.

Reversing the order handed by the HC and the trial court docket, a three-judge bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan stated {that a} match case for pre-arrest bail was made out seeking to the standing of the petitioner who retired as Punjab’s DGP after 30 years of service and the lengthy delay of 29 years for the State to lodge contemporary cost of homicide towards Saini.

The bench, additionally comprising Justices RS Reddy and MR Shah directed that within the occasion Saini was arrested in reference to this case, he shall be launched on bail on furnishing private bond of Rs one lakh and two sureties. He must give up his passport and cooperate with the investigation, the bench added.

The incident occurred in 1991 when one Balwant Singh Multani, a junior engineer with Chandigarh Industrial and Tourism Corporation was arrested by a group of Punjab Police in reference to a automotive bomb blast on August 29, 1991 that killed three policemen whereas inflicting accidents to Saini. Police claimed that Multani escaped from police custody quickly after his arrest.

The case took a contemporary twist in May this 12 months when Multani’s brother filed a criticism alleging homicide of Multani by seven cops together with Saini. The case was registered at Mohali’s Mataur police station, initially beneath prices of kidnapping for homicide (IPC Section 364) however in August, the cost of homicide (IPC Section 302) was added. Two cops who have been co-accused with Saini turned approvers and narrated the brutal custodial torture inflicted on Multani on the occasion of Saini.

The bench famous, “A long delay like 29 years as in the present case can certainly be a valid consideration for grant of anticipatory bail.” Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi who appeared for Saini argued that swiftly the brother of the sufferer had woken up in an incident 29 years previous and even co-accused have turned approvers to harass and victimize Saini, who was a embellished officer.

The bench famous this reality and stated, “In this FIR….Section 302 IPC has been added on the basis of the statements of the approvers only (Jagir Singh and Kuldip Singh). We are of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for anticipatory bail.”

Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra who sought custodial interrogation of Saini defended the state by saying, “Mere delay or political vendetta cannot be a ground to quash the criminal proceedings, more particularly, when the allegations are very serious and the allegations against the police officers are of misuse of power, kidnapping and thereafter killing the innocent person.”