Login Register
Follow Us

Court imposes costs on state for arrests despite bail order

Show comments

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, January 20

Nearly six years after two accused were arrested in a case by the Amritsar police despite bail orders, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has awarded costs of Rs 1 lakh each to the duo. For the purpose of payment, Justice Surinder Gupta has set a three-month deadline.

Justice Gupta also made it clear that the costs would be payable by the state. It would, in turn, be at liberty to recover the amount from the person/official found to be at fault.

The order came on a contempt petition against Amritsar Commissioner of Police and other respondent by Swaran Singh Khera and another petitioner through counsel GK Mann. The two were allowed regular bail by Amritsar CJM in a case registered in September 2010, for criminal intimidation and other offences. The regular bail was allowed after they surrendered in court. But they were again arrested by ASI Prabhjot Singh, leading to the filing of the contempt petition.

Justice Gupta asserted that it was not disputed that the petitioners allowed regular bail in the FIR were arrested and produced in the court despite bail order. The services of the ASI concerned were placed under suspension before a departmental inquiry was initiated. He was, however, exonerated and the inquiry report was accepted by Amritsar Commissioner of Police, resulting in the dropping of charges against him.

Justice Gupta added that the facts showed that the inquiry officer was “kind enough” to exonerate the ASI of the charges and the “worthy” Commissioner of Police agreed with the report. If a person on bail under the court orders was arrested again in a bailable case, he would certainly cry hoarse to proclaim he was on bail. It was proved from inquiry report that order granting bail was also shown to the court when petitioners were produced after their arrest. It appeared from Amritsar Assistant Commissioner of Police Amadeep Singh Brar’s statement that the respondent-ASI also made them sit outside the court at 8.30 am, much before the Court time.

He did not make an entry in the register at the police station about the petitioners’ arrest, did not prepare a memo of the arrest, did not give information to their relatives and did not prepare a memo of personal search.

“The petitioners have suffered agony, insult and harassment due to their arrest despite being on bail, but the state has been kind enough to exonerate the person responsible for all this. It has been stated that respondent-ASI has since retired from service….,” Justice Gupta added.

The case

The two petitioners were allowed regular bail by Amritsar CJM in a case of criminal intimidation and other offences. Regular bail was allowed after they surrendered in court. But they were again arrested, leading to the filing of the contempt petition.

Show comments
Show comments

Trending News

Also In This Section


Top News



Most Read In 24 Hours