New Delhi, Aug 18 A Delhi court has granted bail to a man accused of providing the location and photographs of a businessman's house where gunshots were allegedly fired during a bid to extort Rs 20 lakh, saying police had presented "completely contradictory narratives" about key evidence in the case.
Additional Sessions Judge Hargurvarinder Singh Jaggi was hearing the bail plea of Anup Singh alias Annu Sejwal, who was arrested on July 11 and was seeking bail for the fourth time in connection with an FIR registered under provisions relating to attempted culpable homicide, causing hurt, criminal conspiracy and common intention, besides sections of the Arms Act.
In an order dated August 17, the court said, "While the gravity of the offence under sections 308(4) and 125 of the BNS involving firearms cannot be undermined, gravity alone cannot be the sole basis for denying regular bail when the investigative necessity has ceased."
According to the prosecution, gunshots were fired outside complainant Mahavir Singh Sejwal's Lado Sarai residence on June 1, followed by abuses and death threats. Later, a co-accused allegedly called the complainant on WhatsApp and demanded Rs 20 lakh, threatening to kill him if the money was not paid.
According to police, two arrested co-accused had disclosed that Singh had provided information about the complainant's financial status and ability to pay the extortion amount.
Noting that this was the fourth bail plea of the accused, the court said police had displayed "glaring and highly-compromised conduct" by presenting two contradictory versions within three weeks.
"The court is compelled to address the glaring and highly-compromised conduct of the local police in presenting two completely contradictory narratives to this court within a span of three weeks," the judge said.
The court noted that in an earlier status report, police had alleged that a key witness was threatened with death and that the accused was monitoring police activity digitally. However, these allegations and the statement of the witness were omitted from a subsequent report filed on August 12.
The court said an investigating agency cannot take fluctuating and "compromised stances" when a citizen's personal liberty is at stake, observing that pre-trial detention has a "substantial punitive content" and cannot be used as pre-trial punishment.
The investigators also allegedly found a mobile phone containing a video clip of police proceedings at the complainant's house on the day of the firing. A neighbour, Vanshika, had also alleged that Singh had coerced her into providing photographs and location details of the house and later, threatened to kill her if she disclosed his name.
The court, however, noted that the investigation was complete, the chargesheet was filed on August 10 and no physical recovery was pending from Singh.
It also noted that he was arrested 40 days after the firing incident and that his arrest was based on a disclosure statement.
It granted Singh regular bail subject to stringent conditions, including a bar on contacting prosecution witnesses and the complainant.
