<p>A bench of justices B Sudershan Reddy and S S Nijjar cancelled the bail of the accused policemen Ajit Singh, Santosh Kumar Jaiswal, Nitin Chauhan, Gopal Dutt Bhatt, Rajesh Bisht, Chandra Mohan Singh Rawat and Niraj Yadav on the appeal filed by the deceased Ranbir Singh's father Ravindra Pal Singh.<br /><br />The prosecution had contended that Ranbir, an MBA student from Meerut, went to Dehradun in search of a job when the police personnel of Dalanwala police station on July 2, 2009, pumped 29 bullets into him from close after branding him as a robber.<br /><br />As the accused were local police personnel, the case was entrusted to CBI.<br /><br />However, the Uttarkhand High Court granted bail to the accused police personnel, following which the aggrieved father appealed in the apex court seeking its cancellation as he feared threat to the witnesses.</p>.<p>According to the post mortem report, the police officials fired 29 bullets at the deceased, 17 of these bullets hit the deceased at a very close range and 9 bullets were fired from a maximum distance of 3 feet.<br /><br />"We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel. We are of the considered opinion that the allegations made against the respondents cannot be brushed aside at this stage.<br /><br />CBI, after investigation of the matter, has already submitted the charge sheet.<br /><br />"According to the prosecution, all the accused were involved in the fake encounter in which an innocent young man lost his life. The High Court also ought to have taken into consideration the serious nature of the allegations, the possibilities of undue influence being exerted on the witnesses for the prosecution at the instance of the police officials.<br /><br /> In our opinion, the High Court committed a serious error in granting bail to the respondents," Justice Nijjar, writing the judgement, said.<br /><br />The CFSL report had confirmed 29 bullets were fired at the deceased, 17 of which hit him from a very close range as there was blackening surrounding the wounds. It was also opined that atleast 9 bullets were fired at the deceased from actual distance of 3 feet.<br /><br />"Given the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it is necessary to ensure that there is no possibility of any undue influence being exerted by the respondents on the prosecution. The complainant has made a serious grievance about the manner in which the prosecution has been conducted.<br /><br />"We would refrain from recording any firm opinion on the issue at this stage. However, at the same time, it must be ensured that the prosecution witnesses are able to depose without any fear of repercussions. This can only be ensured by transferring the criminal case out of the area in which no allegations could be made of undue influence against the prosecution, the bench said.<br /><br />Accordingly, the apex court transferred the case from the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, Dehradun, to the Court of Special Judge, CBI, Delhi. </p>
<p>A bench of justices B Sudershan Reddy and S S Nijjar cancelled the bail of the accused policemen Ajit Singh, Santosh Kumar Jaiswal, Nitin Chauhan, Gopal Dutt Bhatt, Rajesh Bisht, Chandra Mohan Singh Rawat and Niraj Yadav on the appeal filed by the deceased Ranbir Singh's father Ravindra Pal Singh.<br /><br />The prosecution had contended that Ranbir, an MBA student from Meerut, went to Dehradun in search of a job when the police personnel of Dalanwala police station on July 2, 2009, pumped 29 bullets into him from close after branding him as a robber.<br /><br />As the accused were local police personnel, the case was entrusted to CBI.<br /><br />However, the Uttarkhand High Court granted bail to the accused police personnel, following which the aggrieved father appealed in the apex court seeking its cancellation as he feared threat to the witnesses.</p>.<p>According to the post mortem report, the police officials fired 29 bullets at the deceased, 17 of these bullets hit the deceased at a very close range and 9 bullets were fired from a maximum distance of 3 feet.<br /><br />"We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel. We are of the considered opinion that the allegations made against the respondents cannot be brushed aside at this stage.<br /><br />CBI, after investigation of the matter, has already submitted the charge sheet.<br /><br />"According to the prosecution, all the accused were involved in the fake encounter in which an innocent young man lost his life. The High Court also ought to have taken into consideration the serious nature of the allegations, the possibilities of undue influence being exerted on the witnesses for the prosecution at the instance of the police officials.<br /><br /> In our opinion, the High Court committed a serious error in granting bail to the respondents," Justice Nijjar, writing the judgement, said.<br /><br />The CFSL report had confirmed 29 bullets were fired at the deceased, 17 of which hit him from a very close range as there was blackening surrounding the wounds. It was also opined that atleast 9 bullets were fired at the deceased from actual distance of 3 feet.<br /><br />"Given the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it is necessary to ensure that there is no possibility of any undue influence being exerted by the respondents on the prosecution. The complainant has made a serious grievance about the manner in which the prosecution has been conducted.<br /><br />"We would refrain from recording any firm opinion on the issue at this stage. However, at the same time, it must be ensured that the prosecution witnesses are able to depose without any fear of repercussions. This can only be ensured by transferring the criminal case out of the area in which no allegations could be made of undue influence against the prosecution, the bench said.<br /><br />Accordingly, the apex court transferred the case from the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, Dehradun, to the Court of Special Judge, CBI, Delhi. </p>