LexARVINDER VIR SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B ARVINDERVIR SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR AUGUST 5, 1998 [G.T. NANA VAT!, S.P. KURDUKAR AND SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI, JJ.] Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Sections 195(J)(b)(i) and 340- 0ffences against public justice as contemplated under Sections 193, 194, 211 C and 218 !PC committed in, or in relation to, any proceedings in a court- Abduction and murder of an Advocate and his family members-On an inquiry conducted by Supreme Court, CBI directed to conduct an inquiry and file a final report-Report suggesting that appellant and 3 other police officers falsely implicated a person in this case-Supreme Court directing D acquittal of that person falsely implicated and directing CBI to file cha/Ian in the Designated Court and transferring the trial from one court to another-- CBI filed a cha/Ian pursuant to which a non-bailable warrant was issued against the erring police officers for offences punishable under Sections 193, 194, 211 and 218 IPC-Held, for offences punishable under Sections 193, 194, 211 and 218, complaint by court concerned after holding a preliminary E inquiry necessary-Supreme Court cannot direct the trial Court to try those offences-Direction given by Supreme Court in Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association's case does not run counter to the interpretation given to Sections 195 and 340 Cr. PC in Raj Singh's case-CBI misunderstood the direction given in Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association's case F and instead of fl/ ing a cha/Ian for an offence of abduction and murder, filed it for offences punishable under Sections 193, 194, 211, and 218 IPC-Order taking cognizance under Sections 193, 194, 2JJ, and 218 quashed and the Designated Court directed to make a complaint to a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try those offences-However, inquiry under Section 340 having already been held as per the direction of Supreme Court, process issued by G the Designated Court against the accused persons need not be set aside-- CBI directed to file cha/Ian in the Designated Court for the offence of abduction and murder as directed in Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association's case-Penal Code, 1860, Sections 193, 194, 211 and 218. On 8.2.1993 a criminal offence was registered at Police Station 'R' i H against one HS, on the basis of 'Ruqua' sent by the appellant who was SHO. 1004 ARVINDERVIR SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB 1005 It was alleged that HS and one SS had abducted an Advocates his wife and his A child with an intention to murder them. During interrogation, HS was stated to have disclosed that he and SS had already committed murder of those three persons. On that information, police raided one shop wherein SS and one RS were present but they consumed cyanide before they could be apprehended. On 12.2.1993, HS was stated to have made an extra judicial confession before B one AS that he and co-accused SS had abducted those three persons, committed their murder and the dead bodies were thrown in a Canal along with their car. Pursuant thereto, police recovered the car from the canal on 12.2.1993. On 11.3.1993 an application was given by HS to the Sessions Judge, for making a confession. At this Stage, the State Bar Association filed a writ petition in c the High Court that the investigation made by the police in this case was not fair and that an inquiry be ordered by CBI. High dismissed the writ petition. On appeal filed by the Bar Association before the Supreme Court, CBI was directed to conduct an inquiry and file a report. CBI after registering the case made investigation and filed a final report before Supreme Court, wherein it was stated that HS had been falsely implicated in the case; that appellant, D another ASI, one Inspector and DSP were prima facie responsible for false implication of HS and were liable for prosecution for offences under Section ) 193, 194, 211 and 218 IPC; and that State Government may be requested for taking suitable action against the DIG for his lack of supervision. Supreme Court directed the registration of c'lSe against the said erring E officials including the appellant while directing the release of HS and transferred the case from District Court, Nabha to District Court, Chandigarh. CBI filed charge-sheet in the Designated Court On 2.9.1996 appellant moved an application for cancellation of non-bailable warrant against him and that all proceedings initiated and process issued pursuant to the charge
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.