{2017 Panchkula arson case} 69 acquitted as prosecution’s case falls flat

In a significant setback for the Haryana Police, the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Ajay Kumar acquitted all 69 accused in a 2017 case related to the violence that erupted in Panchkula following the conviction of Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh. The accused, hailing from various states including Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Delhi, were charged under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.

While acquitting the accused, the court said, “...because it is a case of prosecution that number of followers of Baba Gurmeet Ram Rahim attacked the police party, then it was of utmost importance that the identification parade should have been conducted by the police during the course of investigation, to ascertain the identity of the assailants/attackers.”

The FIR, registered at Sector-14 Police Station, Panchkula, included charges under IPC Sections 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (unlawful assembly), 186 (obstructing public servant in discharge of public functions), 307 (attempt to murder), 341 (wrongful restraint), 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty), and 188 (disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant), along with Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. Initially, the present case was committed to the court of sessions as an offence under Section 307 of IPC was involved. But later, no offence under Section 307 IPC was found to be made out.

The prosecution’s case initiated from a complaint filed by the then SHO of Sector-14 Police Station, inspector Satish Kumar, who alleged that a police patrol vehicle was attacked by Dera followers near Aggarwal Bhawan, Sector 16, Panchkula. The complaint stated that the accused used sticks and iron pipes to damage the police vehicle and assault the officers.

However, the court found significant discrepancies and weaknesses in the prosecution’s evidence. Notably, inspector Satish Kumar, the complainant, admitted during cross-examination that he did not conduct any investigation and had no personal knowledge of the case, only preparing the challan.

Furthermore, despite allegations of a life-threatening attack, no police personnel underwent medical examination. The court also highlighted inconsistencies in the recovery of weapons and the timing of arrests, citing documentary evidence that contradicted witness testimonies.

The court also noted the failure of the prosecution to conduct an identification parade, which was deemed crucial given the large number of alleged assailants.

CJM Ajay Kumar concluded that the prosecution miserably failed to prove its case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts, leading to the acquittal of all 69 individuals. The court’s decision underscores the importance of thorough investigation and consistent evidence in criminal proceedings.

Court’s observations

-Complainant, during cross-examination, said he did not conduct any investigation, and ad no personal knowledge about the present case.

-Despite the attack being so severe that even the offence under Section 307 IPC was initially invoked by the police, none of the police personnel got himself medically examined.

-Two sub-inspectors disposed that five accused were arrested firstly and thereafter, weapons (iron pipes) were recovered from them, but as per the documentary evidence, recovery was affected on August 25. Whereas, the arrest of those five accused persons was only made the next day.

-During his cross-examination, prosecution witness Sanjay Chopra deposed that in the photograph of a damaged vehicle, none of the accused persons can be seen and that he did not even know who took the photograph in question and from which camera.