Must communicate grounds of arrest: Last week’s judgement in focus as SC orders release of lawyer arrested in murder case linked to gangster Kapil Sangwan

While as of Wednesday, Vikram continued to be in jail, Bhanu added that they will furnish the bail bond of Rs 10,000, as directed by the SC, to the magistrate concerned by 10 am on Thursday, and expect the same to be conveyed to the jail authorities in the first ‘daak’ which leaves at 12 pm.

Vikram Singh’s arrest, according to the police, was courtesy a disclosure statement in March 2024 where a gang member and a co-accused, alleging that following instructions from Kapil Sangwan, Vikram was paid Rs 2 lakh in December 2023 to arrange a weapon. With no recovery made or corroborative evidence in hand, Bhanu Singh pointed out that “disclosure statement is the weakest evidence in a criminal case.”

In his plea before the SC, Vikram had claimed that the police action appeared to be retaliation for Vikram pursuing all possible legal remedies for the gangster and their gang members.

In April and May 2024, a magistrate had ordered for preservation of CCTV footage in relation to one of Vikram’s clients after Vikram had alleged custodial torture. After perusal of the footage, the magistrate had recorded “serious concern over the inconsistency between medical records and visible physical injury, raising suspicion of custodial mistreatment.” Subsequently, he also managed to secure bail and discharge for other gang members.

Bhanu surmised that this may have irked the police.

Vikram Singh had received a notice in June under Section 41-A Cr.P.C from STF Gurugram, directing him to appear in connection with FIR No. 58/2024. According to his plea, following the notice, “the investigating officer (IO) began to pressurise and intimidate” him to disclose details concerning his clients. The calls from the IO purportedly continued and on October 31, when he visited the STF Police Station, Gurugram, he was arrested without being provided grounds of arrest.

While the SC’s relief is only interim in nature, given that Vikram is seeking quashing of all criminal proceedings against him, Wednesday’s direction has, however, been reassuring for lawyers.

Welcoming the apex court’s order, advocate VK Singh, chairperson of the All District Courts Bar Associations of Delhi, said, “It is a very good order… they (police) practically implicated him for taking fees from the client, how could it be so? A lawyer will obviously take their fees. This becomes all the more important for criminal lawyers since they have an interface with the police everyday.”

Notably, the Delhi High Court Bar Association, on November 4, had issued a resolution through its executive committee strongly condemning the action of the STF, Gurugram, “in illegally implicating and arresting advocate Vikram Singh, a member of our Bar in a false case.” The DHCBA had noted that “such action amounts to gross misuse of power and is an attack on the independence of the legal profession.”

“Every advocate has the right to discharge professional duties without fear or intimidation” and the DHCBA had demanded that “the false proceedings against him be immediately withdrawn and those responsible for this unlawful act be held accountable.”

The same day, the coordination committee of All District Courts Bar Associations of Delhi had resolved to go on strike on November 6 “to protest against this arbitrary decision” and had termed the arrest as “a deliberate attack on the independence of the legal profession and an attempt to intimidate and silence advocates from discharging their professional duties without fear.”