Dingerheri Rape, Murders: Punjab & Haryana High Court Rejects Bail Plea Of Accused, Says Sufficient Evidence Pointing Towards His Involvement

Observing that there is “sufficient evidence" pointing towards his involvement in the "gruesome and horrible act”, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has rejected the bail plea of an accused in the Mewat gangrape and double murder case.

“Acting with sheer disregard to life and dignity, the accused butchered, injured members of a family and committed rape with females, one of whom was a child aged 14, adjacent to the bodies of their kin lying in a pool of blood. The oral testimony of Prosecutrix A (rape victim) and injured member (xxx) explicitly connects the present petitioner to the occurrence,” said Justice Anoop Chitkara.

The evidence collected in the investigation by CBI at this stage is not such that his complicity and collusion can be negated at the face of it, said the court.

It was hearing the bail plea of Amit Yadav @ Sonu Yadav, one of the accused, in the case under 120-B IPC read with Sections 302, 307, 376-D, 376(2)(i), 323, 325, 459, 460 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. He is accused of conspiring with other co accused and actively participating in the barbarous double murder, rape and robbery.

In August 2016, a couple was murdered and a minor girl and her cousin were raped in Mewat's Dingerheri village. 

Pursuant to the investigation conducted by the Haryana Police, four accused, namely, Sandeep, Amarjeet, Karamjeet and Rahul Verma were arrested, who were also identified by the victim girls in Test Identification Parade. Thereafter the State transferred the investigation to the CBI.

In 2018, CBI through its charge sheeted another 4 accused who are stated to be members of Bawaria Group. During further investigation under Section 173(8) CrPC, CBI found involvement of other accused namely Amit Yadav @ Sonu Yadav-present petitioner, Tej Pal and Ravinder @ Fauji.

While dismissing the application, the court said, “However, considering the seriousness of matter, this court requests the concerned trial court to make all endeavors to conclude the trial (by) 31st October, 2023, of which the prosecution evidence be completed by 31st August, 2023, and the remaining time to provide an opportunity to the accused to lead defence evidence, if so desired.”

The court clarified that order speeding-up the trial is subject to the condition that neither the petitioner shall seek any adjournment nor try to use any tactics to delay the trial. "If they do so, this order of expediting the trial shall stand automatically recalled by resorting to Section 362, read with Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, without any further reference to this court. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of," it added.

Case Title: Amit Yadav @ Sonu Yadav v. Central Bureau of Investigation

Present: Ivan Singh Khosa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Rajeev Anand, Standing counsel for CBI.

Sarfraj Hussain, Advocate for the complainant.