ORDER

This is an habeas corpus petition to secure the release of Sadhu Singh, Gurdeep Singh, Amanjit Singh, Hardev Singh, Davinder Singh, Sukhdev Singh and Sharanjit Singh. On 15th September, 1994, having considered the pleadings and the arguments of learned counsel, we passed a detailed order. This order must be read with that earlier order.

2. For the reasons set out in the earlier order, we directed that an enquiry should be conducted by the Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation, which would cover :

"(a) the circumstances of the abduction of said 7 persons (b) their liquidation; (c) how it was that the inquiry into the complaint was delayed from 25th January, 1992, when it was received by the office of the 2nd respondent, till 23rd March, 1994, when the case was registered; (d) whether it is in conformity with good police administration that a complaint of abduction of 7 citizens by a high ranking police officer should not be required to be brought to the attention of the officer in command of the police force even after the allegations made in the complaint had been found to be correct on inquiry by a specially designated officer, (e) whether there has been an attempt to cover-up the misdoings of police officers and policemen involved in the abduction of the said 7 persons and their subsequent incarceration or liquidation; and (f) if so, who was involved therein."

3. We now have before us the report dated 15th December, 1994, of the Director of Central Bureau of Investigation, in which he concludes :

(a) The said 7 persons were forcibly removed from their farmhouse in village Bagga, District Majitha, State of Punjab on 29th October, 1991, by a police party led by Baldev Singh, D. S. P. The abduction was effected because it was suspected by the said Baldev Singh that the said 7 persons had had a role to play in the abduction by terrorists of his younger brother.

(b) It could reasonably be concluded that the said 7 persons had been killed. No evidence showed that any of the said 7 persons was still alive. As the incident had taken place more than three years back, the chances of recovering the bodies or other evidence was minimal.

(c) The writ petitioner had made a written complaint two and a half months after the abduction. During that period he had approached the said Baldev Singh and Sita Ram, S. S. P., Batala, a number of times. Their assurances led to the delay in his complaining to higher officers. The said Sita Ram had not intervene when the 7 persons were still alive and in unlawful custody. An intervention at this stage would have prevented their liquidation. The enquiry into the writ petitioners complaint remained with the D. I. G., Border Range, Amritsar, for more than 8 months and with the S. S. P. Batala, for 2 months. The Crime Branch of the Punjab Police had pursued the matter and, disagreeing with the recommendations of the District and Range officers, had registered a case and charge-sheeted 9 accused (the alleged members of the police party).

(d) The file was at no stage put up before the Director General of Police, Punjab, but it would have been "prudent and administratively correct to do so."

(e) The abduction of the said 7 persons was first brought to the notice of the said Sita Ram a few days after the incident. No enquiry was made by him. No complaint was recorded or investigated.

(f) On receipt of the information and, later, of the written complaint, the said Sita Ram should have taken immediate action and initiated a regular enquiry, if not Investigation.

The C. B. I. report establishes that a Punjab Police officer of the high rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police had, upon the suspicion that the said 7 persons might have been concerned in the abduction of his brother by militants, led a police party unlawfully to their house and abducted them. The said 7 persons had then been kept under unlawful detention in police stations in the State of Punjab, for example, at Kalanaur and Dera Baba Nanak. The