Series on acquittals II: Prosecution cases in Punjab falling flat on ‘hearsay’ evidence, ‘stock’ witnesses

In Harminder Singh Mintoo’s acquittal on May 4 in a case of recovery of explosive material from outside the Nabha LPG bottling plant, the prosecution relied on a shawl, a dhurrie, and sofa cover to prove that Mintoo was involved. The prosecution tried to link Mintoo with the case by drawing a similarity between these articles recovered from the place where the bomb was made and another set of same articles found at the home of another accused. The prosecution also said that a carpet, a mug and stone tiles found at the house of that person were similar to the items recovered of explosive material from outside the Halwara airbase.

Mintoo was an accused in Halwara airbase case also and was acquitted in that on April 27, days before his acquittal in the Nabha bottling plant case. In the case of recovery of explosive material from outside Halwara Air Force Station, while acquitting Mintoo, the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, Amrinder Singh Shergill dismissed one piece of evidence as “merely heresay”. Explosive material was found in a Maruti car near Halwara Air Force Station on January 1, 2010 by a patrolling police party led by Sub Inspector Jasbinder Singh who was posted at Sudhar police station.

Read | Series on acquittals I: Holes in probe, poor evidence pile up cases without conviction in Punjab

Prosecution cases in Punjab falling flat on ‘hearsay’ evidence, ‘stock’ witnesses Mintoo was named in the case on the disclosure statement of the main accused Bakhshish Singh who was acquitted in the case earlier. The prosecution produced two witnesses who claimed to have heard Bakhshish Singh talking to Mintoo to commit crime.

“The said both witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. Otherwise also, their evidence was merely hearsay, which they have heard from accused Bakhshish Singh, since acquitted,” the court pointed noted as it acquitted Mintoo in that case.

While acquitting former Punjab chief minister Beant Singh’s assassin Jagtar Singh Hawara in a 1992 murder and TADA case, a Ropar court on February 14 reproduced the earlier judgment of a court acquitting the other accused in 1996. “…The whole prosecution story appears to have been fabricated with deliberate design to claim higher compensation for the police officials. Such an act on the part of the police officers is condemnable and deplorable.”

Hawara was named as an accused in the 1992 murder case in which a special police officer was allegedly killed. The defence produced a copy of a DDR in which it was mentioned that the SPO was killed after the carbine of a head constable fell on the ground and fired accidentally. Kumar, who was injured, succumbed to injuries later.

The incident happened in Chamkaur Sahib during Shaheedi Jor Mela. The defence argued that an accidental fire was shown to be a murder and terrorist act to claim higher compensation.

Stock witness, the term used for persons who appear as witnesses in several cases, was one of the reasons cited by the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, H S Grewal in December 2014 while acquitting all three accused in the 2007 Shingar Cinema bomb blast case.

Submitting supporting documents in the court, defence counsel argued that while one of the witnesses Jaspal Singh (PW2) was cited as a prosecution witness in as many as five other cases, the other Sukhwant Singh (PW3) was cited as prosecution witness in three other cases.

Jaspal deposed that he knew Harminder Singh, the main accused, and had placed an order for getting visiting cards printed from the press that he ran. However, he could not tell the residential address of Harminder nor could he recall the name of the press, the court pointed out.

The same witness then claimed to have seen two other accused sitting in an auto outside Shingar cinema on the day of blast and gave description of their height. The court noted it was highly improbable that anyone could guess the height of persons seated in an autorickshaw. The prosecution claimed Jaspal recorded his statement on November 12, 2007, at a police station, but the record did not show Jaspal having visited a police station to record his statement.

During cross-examination of “stock witness” Sukhwant Singh, it came out that he had been released from Tihar jail on bail in a case relating to illegal immigration. The court pointed out that Sukhwant deposed that he heard the noise of the bomb blast on 14.10.2007, but he his statement was recorded exactly a month later, on 15.11.2007.

Onus lies on prosecution: KPS Gill

KPS Gill, former Director General of Police of Punjab, said the onus for acquittals was on the prosecution. “Prosecution is run by the government. Police have no control over prosecution,” Gill said, when asked for his comment over large number of acquittals and that was it because police were naming wrong people.

Asked that it must be FIR by the police on which prosecution builds its case, Gill said, “No. Prosecution builds its case on the basis of evidence, statement of witnesses etc. I know…in a personal case, evidence was provided to the prosecution, but prosecution denied having been presented with the evidence.”

Gill, who is credited with wiping out terrorism from the state, said “ Prosecution was still highest in Punjab as compared to any other State during terrorism.”