Punjab and Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Sanjay @ Fauji in UAPA Case

Accused of Orchestrating Attack on Police, Absconding for 7 ½ Years; Bail Denied Amid Serious Allegations and Pending Witness Examinations

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has denied bail to Sanjay @ Fauji, an appellant accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA), sedition, and other grave charges, in connection with the violent incident at Satlok Ashram in Barwala, Hisar, Haryana. The judgment, delivered by a division bench comprising Justices Deepak Sibal and Lapita Banerji, refused to grant bail to the appellant due to serious allegations, his prolonged evasion from arrest, and the pending examination of key witnesses.

The case revolves around a violent confrontation on November 18, 2014, when police officials attempted to execute arrest warrants for Baba Rampal. The prosecution alleges that Sanjay, an ex-serviceman and Baba Rampal's son-in-law, orchestrated an attack on police officials using trained followers and weapons. The attack led to injuries to 111 police personnel, among whom eight sustained firearm injuries, while others were hurt by petrol bombs and stone pelting.

Sanjay has faced accusations of imparting military training to a mini-army maintained by Baba Rampal, further aggravating the charges under UAPA. Despite his acquittal in other criminal cases, including one under Section 174A IPC related to his declaration as a proclaimed offender, the court emphasized the technical nature of his acquittal due to procedural non-compliance under Section 195 Cr.P.C.

The appellant's evasion of arrest for over seven years, coupled with his alleged influence, was highlighted by the court as factors demonstrating his capacity to affect the trial process. The prosecution's case against Sanjay includes allegations that he supervised the violent actions against law enforcement officials, resulting in extensive injuries and damage to public property.

The court underscored the stipulations under Section 43-D of the UAPA, which impose additional restrictions on bail for accused individuals under specific chapters of the Act. The judgment noted that these restrictions are supplementary to those under the Criminal Procedure Code, further complicating Sanjay's bail prospects.

The denial of bail also considers Sanjay's potential influence over the trial's outcome, given his familial ties to Baba Rampal and the possibility of impacting witness testimonies. The court has directed the State to expedite the examination of material witnesses within four months, allowing Sanjay to renew his bail plea thereafter.

The decision marks a significant stance by the judiciary in handling cases under UAPA, especially where the accused's actions pose threats to public order and safety. The court's emphasis on the seriousness of the allegations and the need for a thorough examination of evidence reflects its commitment to ensuring justice amidst complex legal and procedural challenges.

Bottom Line:

Bail under UAPA - Bail not granted to appellant accused of sedition and offences under UAPA due to allegations of orchestrating attack on police officials and imparting military training to followers of Baba Rampal. Appellant absconded for 7 ½ years and evaded arrest, influencing the investigation and trial process.

Statutory provision(s): Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 Section 43D(5), Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 195, Indian Penal Code Section 174A, Indian Arms Act, 1959 Sections 25, 27, 30, 54 & 59, Explosive Substances Act, 1908 Sections 3 and 4, Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 Sections 3 and 4.

Sanjay @ Fauji v. State of Haryana, (Punjab And Haryana)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2810965