STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: Excise Magistrate Jammu Umesh Sharma rejected bail plea of a notorious gangster Raja Singh involved in broad daylight robbery at Gandhi Nagar. The allegations against accused were regarding commission of offences punishable under sections 395/342/120-B of IPC, 3/25 of Indian Arms Act.
The Excise Magistrate after hearing Advocate Narinder K Attri for applicant Raja Singh whereas APP Yogesh Bamba with SHO Gandhi Nagar Pankaj Sharma and Advocate Sahib Aggarwal (complainant), present in person, observed that as robbed money is yet to be recovered and many other accused persons involved in robbery are yet to be nabbed by the SIT, mere factum of accused being in judicial custody can’t entitle him to seek bail especially when accused is involved in such a serious crime. “Indisputably, the applicant, at present, is in judicial lockup but it doesn’t mean that the investigation of the case is complete.
Prima facia, it appears that in case the accused is enlarged on bail, there is every apprehension that he may temper with evidence and may also come in contact with absconding accused persons and may then hamper the investigation of the case. Moreover, while deciding the plea of the accused for bail, the antecedents of the accused can’t be ignored. Police report has shown that instant case is not the only case registered against accused but, as per the record submitted by SIT, accused Raja Singh, son of Sardar Gurdev Singh. resident of Hoshisrpur, at present Patiala City, is also involved in three more FIRs registered in Dasua, Hoshiyarpur (Punjab), which clearly indicate that accused Raja Singh is not a first-time offender,” the Court observed. “In view of facts and circumstances, the Court is of the considered view that a strong prima facia has been made out against applicant/accused. Offences allegedly to have been committed by the accused are very serious in nature and are considered as menace and threat to the society. Personal liberty of the accused is without any doubt his constitutional guarantee but the same can be refused in accordance with the procedure established by law and is required to be balanced with the impact of the offence upon the society. Therefore, prayer of the applicant for grant of bail is rejected and application is hereby dismissed. It is made clear that any observation made hereinabove are strictly for the disposal of the instant application only and shall not be construed an expression of opinion while deciding the main case as and when filed,” the Court directed.
As per the details of the case, Police report revealed that on 07.12.2022 at 7 am, ten armed persons, wearing upper jersey and caps of J&K Police, entered house of complainant and held him as well as his wife, parents, 2 domestic helps and driver as hostages on gun point and left house at 12.30 PM after settling extortion money @ Rs 12 to 15 lakh. During investigation of the case, five accused persons, including applicant, were arrested. At the time, when the police was effecting the arrest of the mastermind of the case namely Harpreet Singh, fired on police party. On disclosure of accused Harpreet Singh, 4 pistols, 6 magazines, 57 live rounds, 3 handcuffs, Rs 4,25,000 cash, 6 upper jersey with logo of J&K Police, 10 police caps with logo of J&K Police, 2 face-masks, 1 notebook, 8 tapes, one pair hand gloves, one black coloured trouser and a pair of black formal shoes were recovered. The SIT found that the main conspirator namely accused Harjeet Singh had planned six different incidents of dacoity, kidnapping and target killing and for accomplishing the plans, had contacted applicant as well as other gangsters of Punjab. For successful execution of Dacoity, the applicant had visited Jammu on two different occasions with mastermind Harpreet and also received Rs 14,000 in this regard. The applicant was also in touch with the other accused Manjeet Singh, who was directly reporting to accused Harpreet Singh. Plan for executing instant robbery was hatched at the residence of accused Harpreet in Jammu and it was decided that each of associates including applicant would receive Rs 5 lakh after robbery. Thereafter, the applicant returned back to Punjab but refused to come back to Jammu for executing robbery as he had some family issues but agreed to provide safe hideouts for absconding accused persons. Through its supplementary report, the SIT has submitted that as per CDR details, more than 100 phone calls have been exchanged between the applicant and accused Manjeet Singh @ Fauji while frequency of these calls increased manifold between 05.11.2022 to 15.11.2022, during the period when applicant visited Jammu to conduct recce and finalize robbery plan. It suggests the nature and gravity of circumstances in which the offences have been committed. Offence punishable under section 395 of IPC is punishable with imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine, and offence is triable by Court of Sessions, thus is very serious in nature.
Pertinently, the occurrence involved in this case is first of its kind and has never been heard in past in Jammu. It has taken place in the heart of the city that too in broad daylight. Moreover, complainant is a practicing Advocate and area where the dacoity has been executed is nearby a high-security zone and considered as one of the safest areas of Jammu. Few of the members of this gang hail from Punjab and are still evading their arrests. As recoveries in the instant case have been affected from Jammu as well as from Punjab and thus it appears to be an inter-state gang, which uses weapons and have criminal background. The involvement of this gang is possible in other high profile murder cases also. The CDR reports, tower locations of the applicant and disclosure of other accused persons especially accused Manjeet @ Faoji, detailing the involvement of the applicant in the crime in minute details, prima facia establishes a case against applicant. Therefore, the arguments of the Counsel for the applicant that the exchange of almost 100 calls, that too prior to the commission of the crime, between applicant and accused Manjeet @ Fauji against whom almost 20 criminal cases have been registered, is no evidence against applicant, are not sustainable. It was also disclosed by police that applicant is one of the main conspirators and has played his role prior to the actual occurrence as well as in conducting recce the house and had also ensured safe hideouts for accused who executed the main robbery.
