Hisar Court Grants Bail in Alleged Organized Crime Case

March 25, 2026

Haryana: A court in Hisar has granted regular bail to Sajjan alias Kala, an accused in an alleged organized crime case, emphasizing that past criminal records alone are not enough to invoke stringent legal provisions.

Court Questions Use of Serious Charges

The court of Additional Sessions Judge Dr. Gagandeep Mittal clarified that merely having previous cases does not justify applying Section 111 of the Indian Penal Code. It stressed that authorities must establish that the accused acted as part of a crime syndicate, supported by concrete evidence of joint criminal activity.

Observing the lack of such proof, the court ruled that imposing a serious charge without clear linkage to organized crime was inappropriate.

Investigation Complete, Bail Granted on Parity

The court noted that the investigation in the case had already been completed and that co-accused individuals had been granted bail earlier. On the principle of parity, Sajjan alias Kala was granted bail on a bond of ₹50,000 along with one surety. He was previously associated with the Vinod alias Kana gang.

Police Failed to Establish Gang Connection

The case originated from an FIR registered at Narnaund police station on November 14, 2025, based on a tip-off. Police had alleged that Vinod alias Kana formed a gang after his release from jail and was involved in extortion, firing incidents, and creating fear in the area.

Sajjan alias Kala was later named in the case and arrested on a production warrant on November 19, 2025.

However, during proceedings, the court found no evidence linking him to any gang-related activities. The prosecution failed to present records showing his involvement in crimes committed jointly with the alleged gang.

The court also noted that although 18 cases had been registered against him between 2011 and 2025, he had been acquitted in several. It ruled that past cases cannot be treated as “continuing unlawful activity” unless clearly tied to organized crime.

Additionally, the court questioned the inclusion of a murder charge in the case, pointing out that no death had occurred. Even the public prosecutor was unable to justify its applicability.

Defense Calls Case False and Misleading

Defense counsel J.S. Rathi argued that the accused had been falsely implicated and wrongly charged under organized crime provisions. He highlighted that several past cases had ended in acquittal, while in others the accused had already served sentences.

The defense further argued that there was no evidence of Sajjan acting in coordination with any gang. It was also pointed out that he was already in custody at the time the FIR was registered, and no weapons were recovered from him—factors that significantly weakened the prosecution’s case.