High Court Grants Bail in Murder Case Due to Lack of Direct Evidence, Strong Circumstantial Evidence Keeps Another Accused Denied Bail
In a significant development, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh delivered a verdict on July 19, 2023, granting bail to one of the accused in a murder case, while denying it to another due to strong circumstantial evidence against him.
The case pertained to two criminal petitions, CRM-M-59376-2022 and CRM-M-58743-2022, seeking regular bail in connection with FIR No. 5 dated 18.02.2021, registered at Police Station GRP Pathankot, Police District Govt. Railway Police Pathankot, District Gurdaspur, under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 302, 379, 411, 404, 201, 120-B, and 34.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta presided over the case. While representing the petitioners, Mr. A.S. Manaise and Mr. G.P.S. Randhawa, Advocate sought bail for petitioner Sarabjit Singh @ Saba, and Mr. M.K. Dogra, Advocate, represented the complainant. Mr. R.S. Khaira, DAG, Punjab, represented the State of Punjab, and again, Mr. A.S. Manaise, Advocate, along with Mr. G.P.S. Randhawa, Advocate, represented petitioner Karanveer Singh.
The court examined the evidence and circumstances surrounding the case. As per the prosecution’s version, the deceased, Vishal, was last seen with petitioner Sarabjit Singh @ Saba before he went missing. The deceased’s motorcycle was found near a railway track, suggesting a possible railway accident. It was alleged that Sarabjit Singh @ Saba, along with his associates, murdered Vishal as an act of revenge for a previous quarrel. Sarabjit Singh @ Saba was found to have sold the deceased’s mobile phone to a co-accused, raising suspicions about his involvement in the crime.
Citing strong circumstantial evidence against Sarabjit Singh @ Saba, the court denied him regular bail. The judge remarked, “In case death of Vishal occurred due to the injuries sustained in the rail accident, his mobile must have been broken and in that eventuality, how the mobile phone of the deceased came in possession of said petitioner Sarabjit Singh @ Saba, who further sold it to Tarun Kumar. Further, why he did not inform the family members of deceased Vishal, in case any rail accident had taken place.”
On the other hand, the court found no direct evidence against petitioner Karanveer Singh, except for a disclosure statement from co-accused Sarabjit Singh @ Saba implicating him in the conspiracy. As a result, the court granted bail to Karanveer Singh.
While dismissing the petition for Sarabjit Singh @ Saba, the judge stated, “Having regard to all the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the nature and gravity of the offence, but without commenting anything on the merits of the case, petitioner Sarabjit Singh @ Saba is held to be not entitled to grant of regular bail.”
Date of Decision: July 19, 2023
Sarabjit Singh @ Saba vs State of Punjab
