E-Paper
SFJ poster case: Mohali court dismisses 6th bail plea of accused
The Mohali court held that there was no change in circumstances since the earlier bail pleas had been rejected and observed that releasing the accused at this stage could lead to tampering with evidence.
A local court on Thursday dismissed the sixth bail application of Jagwinder Singh, an accused in a 2021 case involving alleged display of ‘Referendum 2020’ posters linked to the banned outfit Sikhs for Justice (SFJ).
Additional sessions judge Hardip Singh held that there was no change in circumstances since the earlier bail pleas had been rejected and observed that releasing the accused at this stage could lead to tampering with evidence.
Jagwinder Singh, 32, a resident of Morinda in Rupnagar district, is facing trial in a case registered at the state special operations cell (SSOC), Mohali, under Sections 124A, 153A, 153B and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Sections 17, 18, 18B, 20 and 40 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
According to the prosecution, the SSOC received a tip-off on September 16, 2021, alleging that Jagwinder Singh, Gurwinder Singh alias Baba, Sukhdev Singh alias Rinku and Jagjit Singh Mangat were pasting ‘Punjab Referendum 2020’ posters in Rupnagar, Mohali, Fatehgarh Sahib, Khanna and Ludhiana. Police alleged that the activity was aimed at disturbing public peace and that the accused were being funded by SFJ leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun and other individuals based abroad.
During the investigation, police arrested Jagwinder Singh and two co-accused. They recovered a mobile phone from Jagwinder Singh and another from Sukhdev Singh. Police also recovered pamphlets related to ‘Referendum 2020’, printing equipment, a laptop, printer, mobile phones, ink, paper and material allegedly used to print posters and prepare voter cards from the house of co-accused Gurwinder Singh.
Seeking bail, the defence argued that Jagwinder had been in custody since September 17, 2021, that no incriminating material had been recovered from him, and merely joining a political outfit did not amount to sedition.
Opposing the plea, the prosecution contended that the allegations involved activities linked to a banned organisation and posed a threat to national security.
The court observed that Jagwinder was specifically named in the FIR and that the allegations against him were serious. It also noted that only five prosecution witnesses had been examined while several others were yet to testify. Holding that there was no fresh ground to reconsider bail, the court dismissed the application.
