Delhi: Complainant ‘threatened’, CBI court cancels cop’s bail

NEW DELHI: It is the duty of the court to ensure that witnesses depose fearlessly during trial, a Delhi court observed, while cancelling the bail of a Delhi Police personnel, who is an accused in a corruption case.
The complainant had informed the court that he was being threatened.

“The court cannot lose sight of the fact that the accused is a Delhi Police personnel and therefore it is understandable that the witness would be hesitant to approach the local police,” said special CBI judge Santoshi Snehi Mann. “It is deemed expedient in the interest of justice to cancel the bail of the accused in this case,” the judge added.

CBI informed the court that the complainant, also a key witness in the case, was being threatened by three people who came to his office on March 17. He alleged that the trio warned him with regard to his deposition in court, saying any day could be the last day of his life.

On the day of the argument, senior CBI prosecutor Manoj Shukla informed the court that there were some suspicious people roaming outside the court. Shukla said the accused, Surender Singh, a head constable with Delhi Police had signaled the men to flee after coming to know about the complaint. One of them, however, was caught by cops stationed in the courtroom. The apprehended man turned out to be a lawyer’s clerk and tendered an unconditional apology for having no connection with the case.

Appearing for the policeman, advocate B S Joon, argued that the witness has already deposed against his client during his examination-in-chief. Therefore, Joon argued, his client did not gain anything by threatening the witness. It was also argued that the witness was interested in delaying the matter and did not appear, despite summons, on 45 dates.

Joon also said that no complaint had been made by the witness to the police or any other authority. He further submitted that at the time of alleged incident of threat, the accused was in his chamber and that thorough investigation should be ordered in this case.

The court, meanwhile, observed that the complainant had nowhere mentioned that he was being threatened by the accused. But it was some “unknown persons” who had mentioned to him about his evidence in the case involving the accused.

“Though, the accused has denied allegations made in the complaint, considering the fact that the cross-examination of the witness is still pending, allegation of threat made by the witness cannot be ignored,” the CBI judge observed.