Home India News Apex court rejects former MP’s bail plea in murder case

Apex court rejects former MP’s bail plea in murder case

By IANS,

New Delhi : The Supreme Court Friday dismissed the bail plea of criminal-turned-politician Anand Mohan Singh, a former Lok Sabha member serving life sentence for murdering a Bihar district magistrate in 1994.

A bench of Justice Dalveer Bhandari and Justice Anil R. Dave rejected Singh’s bail plea in which he sought his right to liberty be upheld, and observed: “It is (liberty) dear but it is also dear to others (including those who succumbed to his muscle power).”

The court made these observations when senior counsel K.T.S. Tulsi pleading for Singh’s bail said: “I know liberty is very dear to this court”. He, thereby, suggested that the court should uphold Singh’s right to liberty and grant him bail.

Mohan was sentenced to life term for killing Gopalganj district magistrate G. Krishnaiah Dec 5, 1994.

Tulsi told the apex court his client was a victim of political vendetta unleashed by the then Bihar chief minister Lalu Prasad.

He said Singh was 80 km away from the spot of the incident and could not have travelled that distance within 15 minutes as claimed by the prosecution.

The senior counsel said there were 36 accused, including Singh, in the case. The trial court acquitted 29 accused and sentenced three to death and four others to various prison terms.

The Patna High Court on appeal confirmed the acquittal of 29 accused and set free another six convicts, but confirmed the conviction of Singh. However, the high court converted his death penalty to life term.

Tulsi argued that if on the strength of witness accounts and circumstances the high court set free six of the seven convicts, why were the same factors not applied in Singh’s case to reverse his conviction.

When the apex court did not show much interest in Tulsi’s submission, the senior counsel pleaded that the main petition of Singh challenging the high court verdict should be heard on an early date.

He said his client has already undergone 37 months of sentence and any further delay in hearing his appeal would harm his interest.