Behbal Kalan police firing: Won’t interfere, SIT probe on, says Faridkot court
The court also disposed of application of 7 witnesses and asked the SIT to consider their affidavit for a ‘fair’ probe
A district court on Monday said it won’t interfere in the special investigation team’s (SIT) probe at this stage as investigation in the 2015 Behbal Kalan police firing case was still on. However, the court asked the SIT to consider the affidavit of the witnesses for a ‘fair’ probe.
The court of Faridkot judicial magistrate Chandan made these observations while disposing of an application filed by seven witnesses in the Behbal Kalan police firing case.
In June, seven witnesses, including three family members of post sacrilege firing victim, had moved court accusing former inspector general of police (now AAP MLA) Kunwar Vijay Pratap Singh, who led the probe in the 2015 Behbal Kalan firing incident, of using the case to gain political mileage, twisting their statements, and making arrests without proof.
In the application, they alleged that Kunwar Vijay twisted their statements to suit his agenda. They asked the court to issue directions to the SIT probing the case to record their fresh statements under Section 161 of the CrPc.
Two Sikh protesters — Gurjeet Singh of Sarawan village and Krishan Bhagwan Singh of Niamiwala village in Faridkot district — were killed on October 14, 2015, when they were protesting against the sacrilege incident.
{{/usCountry}}Two Sikh protesters — Gurjeet Singh of Sarawan village and Krishan Bhagwan Singh of Niamiwala village in Faridkot district — were killed on October 14, 2015, when they were protesting against the sacrilege incident.
{{/usCountry}}In May 2021, a new SIT led by then IGP (now ADGP) Naunihal Singh was constituted to probe the Behbal Kalan firing case, which is yet to file a supplementary chargesheet.
{{/usCountry}}In May 2021, a new SIT led by then IGP (now ADGP) Naunihal Singh was constituted to probe the Behbal Kalan firing case, which is yet to file a supplementary chargesheet.
{{/usCountry}}‘SIT keeping all options open to reach conclusion’
{{/usCountry}}‘SIT keeping all options open to reach conclusion’
{{/usCountry}}“The present SIT is conducting further investigation. This is abundantly clear from the status report forwarded by the probe team that the SIT is investigating the matter by keeping all options open to reach a just conclusion. Therefore, no ground is made out to interfere in the investigation conducted by the SIT by this court by invoking jurisdiction under Section 153 (3) (judicial magistrate’s power to investigate cognizable case) of the CrPC. The stage of intervention by the court would arrive at the stage of Section 190 (1) of the CrPC,” the court said.
{{/usCountry}}“The present SIT is conducting further investigation. This is abundantly clear from the status report forwarded by the probe team that the SIT is investigating the matter by keeping all options open to reach a just conclusion. Therefore, no ground is made out to interfere in the investigation conducted by the SIT by this court by invoking jurisdiction under Section 153 (3) (judicial magistrate’s power to investigate cognizable case) of the CrPC. The stage of intervention by the court would arrive at the stage of Section 190 (1) of the CrPC,” the court said.
{{/usCountry}}“However, this court has no hesitation in asking the SIT to take into consideration the affidavit of the applicants so that their apprehension that the investigation is one-sided or lopsided can be ruled out. Moreover, taking an affidavit into consideration may not be binding on the SIT but the investigation will be fairer and just. Hence, the application is disposed of,” the court observed.
The application was moved by Krishan’s sons — Sukhraj Singh and Prabhdeep Singh, and Krishan’s father Mohinder Singh and four key witnesses — Sarabjit Singh, Amritpal Singh, Amandeep Singh and Karamjit Singh. However, refraining from commenting on the merits of the case, the court disposed of the application with only directions to the SIT.
