Punjab: Sacked Mansa sub-inspector convicted of ‘negligence', awarded 23-month jail

Hindustan Times

25-04-2025

A Mansa district court on Wednesday convicted the sacked Mansa CIA in-charge sub-inspector Pritpal Singh of 'acting negligently' that led to the escape of gangster Deepak alias Tinu from police custody in October 2022.
Rubbishing police theory of a 'well-planned conspiracy' behind the crime, the court awarded a jail term of a year and 11 months, along with a ₹5,000 fine, to Pritpal.
Tinu, a close associate of jailed gangster Lawrence Bishnoi, escaped custody on intervening night of October 1 and 2 and was arrested from Ajmer by Delhi Police special cell on October 19 of the same year.
In his 85-page judgment, judicial magistrate 1st class (JMIC) Karan Aggarwal picked holes in the police version and rejected claims of recovery of six weapons from three accused.
A special investigation team (SIT) probing the case had filed a chargesheet against Pritpal, Tinu, Jatinder Kaur alias Jyoti, Kuldeep Singh alias Kohli, Rajvir Kajama, Rajinder Singh Gora, Bittu Singh, Sarabjot Singh, Chirag and Sunil Lohia, on charges of conspiracy to facilitate escape.
The court, however, acquitted seven accused, except Sarabjot who is absconding, of charges of hatching conspiracy and harbouring Tinu.
The JMIC acquitted Pritpal, Chirag and Bittu of charges of possessing firearms. Court raised suspicion over the circumstances under which police claimed the recoveries.
Tinu, who is among the accused in Punjabi singer Sidhu Moose Wala's murder case, was convicted under section 224 (resistance or obstruction by a person to his lawful apprehension) of the Indian Penal Code. He was awarded two-year rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of ₹5,000.
According to police chargesheet, Pritpal had allegedly facilitated Tinu's escape by bringing his girlfriend to his official residence in Mansa as part of a 'conspiracy'.
The court, however, rejected the claim. 'During the trial, nothing came on record to prove that any of the accused persons ever met with each other before the occurrence in question...,' the court said.
CCTV footage presented in the court 'tampered with'
The court observed that CCTV footage produced by the prosecution to prove conspiracy was 'tampered with' as the parcel's seal was broken.
'When the same was played, it was found that certain video footage in the same is not showing any content except a black screen,' the court said.
It added that a PDF file on a hard disc drive, which according to the forensic science laboratory report contained 5,900 files in DVR, was found 'corrupt'.
'This appears to be some hanky-panky,' the order said.
The chargesheet claimed that police recovered two pistols and a revolver from Prtitpal's official residence, two pistols and 12 cartridges from Chirag and a pistol from Bittu.
However, the court was apprised that residence B-4, from where the weapons allegedly tied to Pritpal were recovered, was never allotted to the sacked cop.
Casting doubt on the police's theory, the JMIC observed the statement of the duty magistrate Birbal Singh, deputed for search Pritpal's house, deposed that on October 3, 2022, kothi no B-4 was searched, and nothing was recovered from ground floor.
Birbal deposed that on October 4, 2022, he and police officials again searched the same house, and three weapons were recovered from the first floor.
The court said the keys of the house were (after an initial search on October 3) entrusted to the Barnala deputy superintendent of police (DSP) Sanjeev Goyal, who was neither the investigating officer nor a member of the SIT probing the case. 'This leads to yet another doubt as to why the keys were not entrusted to an independent witness (prosecution witness 39), a duty magistrate, who is a government official.
'Another doubt which accrues in this case is that when house B-4 was searched on October 3, then why first floor of the said building not searched and what circumstances obstructed the raiding party from searching the first floor of the building? These questions remained unanswered throughout the trial. Since the recovery itself is doubtful, the same cannot be attributed to accused Pritpal Singh with certainty,' reads the order.
The court rejected the recovery of weapons from the co-accused Bittu and Chirag as the prosecution failed to prove the report of FSL/ballistic experts.