Chandigarh: The director of Punjab Police’s Bureau of Investigation has set up a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe an FIR lodged against a jailed lawyer from Muktsar, and another against policemen accused opof assaulting, blackmailing and threatening the lawyer with an encounter, besides forcing him to engage in an unnatural act with his client while in custody. The SIT will be headed by Ludhiana Police Commissioner Mandeep Singh Sidhu.
The development comes less than 24 hours after advocates of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, along with those practising in district courts across the two states and Chandigarh went on indefinite strike in solidarity with the lawyer. While the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana withdrew its strike Wednesday, after the formation of the SIT, the Punjab & Haryana High Court Bar Association has decided to continue its strike till Friday.
According to his statement, recorded in the presence of a chief judicial magistrate, the lawyer accompanied his client to a police station on 14 September where the two were allegedly assaulted by policemen, before being taken to another police station where they were allegedly forced to engage in an unnatural act. The lawyer also alleged that the accused police personnel captured the act on video in a bid to silence him and his client.
A copy of the lawyer’s 13-page statement is with ThePrint.
Not too long after the alleged incident, the lawyer practising at the Muktsar district court was arrested on charges of impeding a police investigation. He continues to be behind bars.
His medical examination, conducted on the orders of the chief judicial magistrate, showed that the lawyer had at least 18 bruises on his body.
On 22 September, the chief judicial magistrate ordered the registration of an FIR against seven policemen, including Muktsar Superintendent of Police (Investigation) Ramandeep Singh Bhullar, in connection with the case. However, the FIR was registered against six policemen Monday only after the Bar Council and Bar Association issued a call for a statewide strike, striking lawyers told ThePrint.
On Tuesday, two of the other accused policemen — CIA (crime investigating agency) in-charge inspector Raman Kumar and senior constable Harbans Singh — were suspended. “They were arrested Wednesday along with SP (Investigation) Ramandeep Singh Bhullar,” Muktsar Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Harmanbir Singh Gill told ThePrint.
Adding that the matter will now be probed by the SIT, Gill said the first medical examination of the lawyer, conducted in police custody, did not show any signs of assault. “The lawyer and his client were subjected to a dope test which returned positive,” he said.
Meanwhile, office bearers of the Bar Council and Bar Association met Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann and Director General of Police (DGP) Gaurav Yadav Wednesday to press for their demands: strict action against the accused policemen and Muktsar SSP Gill, besides the transfer of the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Opposition parties in Punjab, the Congress and the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD), have sought the dismissal of the accused policemen.
Terming the alleged police brutality as “extremely deplorable,” Leader of the Opposition Partap Singh Bajwa wrote on X that none of the MLAs and ministers of the ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) ‘who studied and practised law before entering politics have raised their voices against police barbarity against a member of their profession’.
Police brutality against a Muktsar-based lawyer is extremely deplorable. Why can't Punjab CM @BhagwantMann, who also holds the home portfolio dismiss the accused police officials including SP (D) Ramandeep Singh Bhullar and arrest them with immediate effect? It is notable that…
— Partap Singh Bajwa (@Partap_Sbajwa) September 27, 2023
Akali Dal general secretary Daljeet Singh Cheema in a press conference Tuesday demanded a high court-monitored probe or CBI inquiry into the case. The Akali Dal also made public the lawyer’s 13-page statement recorded on 21 September.
Also Read: Mann climbs down from hard line against striking revenue officials, agrees to fill vacant posts
What lawyer told chief judicial magistrate
According to the statement, a client he was defending in a narcotics case contacted the lawyer earlier this month fearing action against him by a village anti-drug committee. The client said committee members were inimical to him and threatened to report him to the SSP, Muktsar.
The lawyer told the judicial magistrate that he advised his client to submit a counter-complaint against committee members to the SSP to ensure that his version is also taken under consideration.
Accompanied by the client, the lawyer went to the SSP office on 13 September but was told to come back later. The next evening, the two went to the Sadar police station to meet the station house officer (SHO) and apprise him of the threat from committee members.
In his statement, the lawyer alleged that the two were returning home when they were accosted by policemen and taken to the criminal investigation police station where they were assaulted for several hours. Just before midnight, the two were made to board a police vehicle and told they were being taken to another police station, he alleged, adding that while en route, policemen told them that they were about to be killed in an encounter.
The lawyer told the chief judicial magistrate that once they reached the second police station, SP Bhullar allegedly joined the accused in assaulting them. He further alleged that Bhullar then ordered the policemen there to take off the client’s clothes and forced him to engage in an unnatural act with the lawyer which was then captured on video. The accused, he alleged, tried to silence them by threatening to make the video public.
On 15 September, the lawyer was booked under sections 332 (causing hurt to deter public servant from duty), 353 (use of criminal force to deter public servant), 186 (obstructing public servant) and 427 (mischief causing loss or damage of Rs 50 or more) of the IPC.
The lawyer also told the chief judicial magistrate that when he was to be presented before a local court, some policemen told him to keep quiet or he would have to go through the same ordeal again.
After he was remanded to judicial custody, the lawyer moved an application in the local court seeking a medical examination and asked that his statement be recorded under section 164 (CrPC), which mandates the presence of a magistrate.
The lawyer was brought on production warrants and underwent a medical examination on 17 September. After recording his statement, the chief judicial magistrate on 22 September ordered the registration of an FIR against SP Bhullar, Inspector Raman Kumar, senior constables Harbans Singh, Bhupinder Singh and Gurpreet Singh, besides home guard Dara Singh and DSP (investigation) Sanjeev Goyal. The accused, barring Goyal, were booked under IPC sections 377 (unnatural offences), 342 (wrongful confinement), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 149 (unlawful assembly) and 506 (criminal intimidation).
“Despite the CJM’s order, police did not register a case till late on 25 September after high court advocates went on strike,” Arshdeep Singh Kler, who heads the Akali Dal’s legal wing, said in a press conference Tuesday.
He also alleged that the police, while registering an FIR against the accused policemen, did not take the lawyer’s 13-page statement on record. “Instead, the FIR was lodged naming the chief judicial magistrate as the complainant which is unheard of,” said Kler.
On Kler’s allegations, SSP Gill said this was on account of a clerical error that has now been rectified by listing the lawyer as the complainant. He also said that DSP Goyal was not named in the FIR as instructed by the chief judicial magistrate on the basis of the lawyer’s statement that Goyal was not present at the time of the alleged incident.
Complicating the case further, Punjab & Haryana HC Bar Association treasurer advocate Parampreet Bajwa claimed in a press conference Tuesday that the Muktsar SSP had withdrawn the security cover of the chief judicial magistrate who directed the police to lodge an FIR against the accused on the basis of the lawyer’s statement.
SSP Gill, however, refuted the allegation and maintained that all government officials and functionaries, including the CJM, were being given security in line with the protocol.
(Edited by Amrtansh Arora)
Also Read: Arrest of Mansa man who ‘assaulted chemist for selling banned drugs’ sparks political war in Punjab