In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-8139 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:24.4.2009 Harvinder Singh and another .....Petitioners v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sudhir Nehra, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in a case that has been registered against them for the offences under Sections 452, 324, 323, 148 and 149 IPC. The FIR in the case has been registered on the statement of Balraj Singh, who has alleged that on 28.2.2009 at about 6.30 p.m. he was present at his house that he heard a noise of `Lalkara’. He opened the main gate of his house and he saw Harvinder Singh (petitioner No.1) armed with a `Kirpan’, Manga (non-petitioner) armed with a `Datar’, Bhupinder Singh (petitioner No.2) armed with a `Datar’, Gurpreet Singh alias Gopi (non- petitioner) armed with a baseball bat, Pala alias Khambi (non-petitioner) armed with a baseball bat and another unidentified person were standing in front of his house. The complainant inquired as to why they were raising `Lalkara’ in front of his house. Then Harvinder Singh (petitioner No.1) Cr. Misc. No.M-8139 of 2009 [2] raised a `Lalkara’ that on the said day Balraj Singh should not go alive and be caught hold of. When the complainant tried to run from the gate then Harvinder Singh (petitioner No.1) attacked him and gave a `Kirpan’ blow which hit him on the back of his head. Manga (non-petitioner) attacked him with his `Datar’-the blow of which hit on his head. Bhupinder Singh (petitioner No.2) gave a `Datar’ blow causing injuries on his left elbow. Gurpreet Singh (non-petitioner) gave a baseball bat blow on his chest and left shoulder. The complainant fell on the ground at the gate itself. While he was lying on the ground Pala alias Khambi (non-petitioner) gave him blows with base ball bat hitting him on his left leg and on the back and he raised an alarm which attracted the attention of his wife and son Manjit Singh who came near him and while they were trying to save him from the clutches of the above assailants, they also caused injuries to his wife and son. Thereafter, the neighbours came and other persons gathered and the assailants ran away from the spot with their respective weapons. The occurrence was witnessed by Swaraj Singh and Gurnek Singh. The motive behind the occurrence was that about six months prior to the occurrence, Manjit Singh son of complainant had a dispute with Harvinder Singh (petitioner No.1) which was compromised but Harvinder Singh (petitioner No.1) had a grudge in his mind due to which Harvinder Singh in connivance with his companions had caused injuries to him and his family. Thereafter, Gurnek Singh took the injured and got him admitted in the hospital. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that except for the offence under Section 452 IPC the other offences are bailable. It is submitted that the said offence is not made out, inasmuch as, the occurrence Cr. Misc. No.M-8139 of 2009 [3] had taken place outside the house of the complainant. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioners or any other alleged assailant trespassed into the house of the complainant. It is submitted that a false case has been foisted on the petitioners on account of previous enmity. In response, learned counsel for the State has submitted that nine injuries had been caused on the person of the complainant besides the assailants including the petitioners came duly armed to the house of the complainant and by entering his house caused the injuries. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the petitioners along with other assailants had come to the house of the complainant and caused injuries to Balraj Singh (complainant). Balraj Singh (complainant) suffered as many as nine injuries. In the order dated 17.3.2009 (Annexure-P.2) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar as regards the offence under Section 452 IPC it was observed that the Investigating Officer had explained that the fight took place inside the house of the complainant near the main gate. Though the question whether the offence under Section 452 IPC is attracted or not is to be considered after evidence has been led, however, the assailants had come to the house of the complainant. Besides, there are serious allegations that the petitioners being duly armed and by coming to the house of the complainant had caused injuries to him. Petitioner No.1 Harvinder Singh is attributed `Kirpan’ blow on the head of the complainant. In the circumstances, no ground for pre-arrest bail is made out. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous petition is dismissed. The observations made herein shall not, in any manner, be Cr. Misc. No.M-8139 of 2009 [4] construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the prosecution and the learned trial Court shall consider the evidence and material as produced before it. April 24, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*