Breaking News SC Cancels Bail of husband of BSP MLA, accused...

SC Cancels Bail of husband of BSP MLA, accused of Murdering Congress leader Devendra Chaurasia

-

New Delhi, Jul 22 (ILNS) The Supreme Court today cancelled the bail of a man accused in Murder case of MP Congress leader Devendra Chaurasia while stating India cannot have two parallel legal systems- one for rich and powerful and politically influential, and the other for common man. 

In the present case Govind Singh, husband of BSP MLA Rambai Singh from Patharia in the state’s Damoh district, MP is an accused in the murder of Congress Leader Devendra Chaurasia.

In a petition filed by the Devendra Chaurasia’s son Somesh Chaurasia, the Top Court had on March 12, directed the DG MP police to arrest the accused. The Court had noted that the facts of the case indicate that despite the registration of an FIR on March 15, 2019, wherein Chaurasia’s son Somesh has alleged that Govind Singh was complicit in the murder of his father, no steps have been taken by the investigating authorities to arrest him.

A bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud & Justice MR Shah said that the present case is fit for cancellation of bail. High Court ignored material concerns while granting bail. The Court said that the investigation in the FIR should have been allowed to proceed and the High Court Order had the effect of interference in Investigation of the FIR. 

The Supreme Court bench categorically stated that State Police have been complicit in shielding Govind Singh. Spouse who is an MLA was provided security in the state but the DGP informed this court that the accused could not be arrested. 

The Top Court has directed to move the murder accused Govind Singh to a different jail to ensure the fair process of law is not affected. 

“If faith of citizens is to be preserved need to look at district judiciary. Trial judges work in very difficult conditions. Colonial mindset towards district judiciary needs to be changed. District judiciary is first line of defence for the people,” the Court noted in its order. 

“Independence of judiciary means independence of each judge. District judges need to be independent also of their superiors in the judiciary. Independence from external influence and control. India cannot have two parallel legal systems- one for rich and powerful and politically influential, and the other for common man,” it added. 

The Supreme Court has asked the Chief Justice of Madhya Pradesh to conduct inquiry into allegations of the Additional Sessions judge (ASJ) who was dealing this case had informed the Supreme court that he is apprehensive about his safety. 

The Apex Court had on July 12, 2021, reserved its verdict on a plea filed by Congress leader’s Son alleging the role of State Machinery in protecting the Murder accused of his father. 

The Court had on previous occasions noted that “Despite its clear directions in order dated March 12, to arrest the husband of a sitting BSP MLA in connection with a 2019 murder case, the MP Police have not been able to apprehend and arrest the accused.”

The Apex Court had termed the affidavit completely “unacceptable” which was filed by the Director General of Madhya Pradesh Police. 

“It defies reasons as to how an accused who is the spouse of a sitting Member of the Legislative Assembly has not been arrested despite being arraigned in pursuance of the provisions of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 to face trial for an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code 1860,” said the bench of Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and M.R. Shah on March 26, 2021. 

The Court had also noted that the accused was even given the Police Security which has now been withdrawn as per the affidavit of the DG Police. The court has given a final opportunity to the State’s DG to comply with the previous order, failing which the Court will take coercive steps in accordance with the law. Further, the Court has directed DG Police to file additional affidavit setting out, the date on which and the cause on the basis of which security was granted to the accused, Whether the security continues to be provided as of the date, and If not, the date on which the security was withdrawn. 

The Court in its previous order of March 12, also took note of the alleged harassment of a judicial officer by the Damoh SP and asked the state DGP to inquire into the allegations leveled by the additional sessions judge. The ASJ had arrayed Govind Singh as an accused under section 319 (power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of an offence) of the CRPC. 

The Court had noted that “the order of the Additional Judge furnishes reasons for taking steps in pursuance of the provisions of Section 319 to arraign the second respondent as an accused. The Additional Session Judge notes that though he was taking action in compliance with the directions issued by this Court for ensuring service of the second respondent, he was being obstructed.” 

The ASJ in its January 8, 2021 order had claimed that the accused “were leveling false allegations against him, adding that he had applied for a transfer from the case as well, which was dismissed by the district judge. He had also noted that he is being pressurized by the SP Damoh and his subordinates. 

The Supreme Court had noted in its order, “We take serious note of the manner in which the Additional Sessions Judge, Hata who is in charge of the criminal case has been harassed by the law enforcement machinery in Damoh. We have no reason to disbelieve a judicial officer who has made an impassioned plea that he was being pressurized as a result of his orders under Section 319 of the CrPC. The State which had moved the High Court for cancellation of the bail which was granted to the second respondent as an incident of the suspension of sentence on 3 February 2016, has failed to apprehend the second respondent who continues to evade arrest. A warrant of arrest was issued against the second respondent.”

The Court had also directed the Director General of Police of the State of Madhya Pradesh to immediately ensure the arrest of the second respondent and report compliance by filing a personal affidavit in this Court. The DGP shall also inquire into the allegations levelled by the second respondent against the Superintendent of Police Damoh by the ADJ in his order dated February 8, 2021, said the Court.  

The Court had directed to provide adequate security to Shri R P Sonkar, 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Hata, District Damoh./ILNS/KR/SNG

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest news

Supreme Court rejects Arcelor Mittal company plea against Gujarat HC order

New Delhi Sept 14(ILNS): The Supreme Court dismissed a plea filed by Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel (AM/NS)...

Supreme Court dismisses plea with Rs 10,000 cost, seeking Rs 50 lakh ex-gratia from Centre for families of lawyers who died before 60

New Delhi Sept 14 (ILNS): The Supreme Court has dismissed a petition with Rs 10,000 cost, seeking...

Delhi High Court grants bail to 2 in connection with the murder of a policeman during the Delhi riots

New Delhi Sept 14(ILNS): The Delhi High Court, today, granted bail to Shahnawaz and Mohd Ayyub in...

Supreme Court says Gorakhpur girl’s marriage to Muslim man won’t stand if she is a minor

New Delhi Sept 14(ILNS): The Supreme Court on Tuesday said the marriage of the minor girl from...

Supreme Court dissolves 20-year-old marriage that was never consummated

New Delhi Sept 14 (ILNS): The appellant-husband and the respondent-wife resolved to tie the marital knot by...

Will it be safe to allow visitors in places of worship with covid protocols? Delhi High Court asks authorities

New Delhi Sept 14 (ILNS): The Delhi High Court today asked the authorities to decide the representation...

Must read

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you