Role in Instigating Crime Critical to Decision: Punjab and Haryana High Court Denies Bail in Murder Case

Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the bail plea of accused of orchestrating a deadly assault that left one person dead and others injured. Justice Anoop Chitkara held that the petitioner’s alleged role in instigating and facilitating the attack, combined with the severity of the charges, warranted continued detention.

Hemraj, the husband of a village sarpanch, was accused of leading an armed mob that attacked the house of the complainant’s uncle. The assault, linked to a political rivalry over a panchayat election and RTI applications alleging fake qualifications, resulted in the death of Sumer Singh and severe injuries to multiple family members.

The incident, which occurred on October 4, 2023, in Palwal district, involved the alleged participation of Hemraj and several co-accused who arrived at the victim's residence in a Scorpio vehicle and motorcycles. Armed with firearms and blunt weapons, they reportedly attacked the household, firing indiscriminately and causing chaos. Hemraj, seated in the Scorpio, is alleged to have incited his accomplices to kill the complainant’s family members.

The attack was attributed to a prolonged political and personal feud, including allegations that Hemraj’s wife had used fraudulent educational qualifications in the panchayat election.

Justice Chitkara emphasized the heinous nature of the crime, noting that Hemraj’s role in leading the attackers was corroborated by eyewitness accounts. The Court found sufficient prima facie evidence to substantiate the claims that Hemraj drove the Scorpio vehicle and instigated the assailants.

The Court remarked, “While Hemraj did not directly inflict injuries, his active participation in orchestrating the assault makes him equally culpable under the law.”

The defense argued that Hemraj’s involvement was fabricated due to political vendetta and pointed to inconsistencies in witness statements. However, the prosecution countered with evidence of Hemraj’s ownership of the Scorpio vehicle and witness accounts placing him at the crime scene.

Justice Chitkara ruled that granting bail at this stage could undermine the trial process, given the severity of the charges and the potential for influencing witnesses. The Court also noted that Hemraj had only been in custody for a year and three months, which was not excessive given the gravity of the allegations.

The Court concluded, “The impact of the crime and the petitioner’s critical role in facilitating it outweigh considerations for bail. Further detention is necessary to preserve the integrity of the trial.”

The judgment reinforces the principle that bail is not an entitlement in cases involving grave offenses, especially when prima facie evidence points to active participation in a conspiracy. The Court’s decision underscores the judiciary’s role in balancing individual liberty with the demands of justice in heinous crimes.

Date of Decision: November 19, 2024.