Crl. Misc. No. M-34256 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-34256 of 2010 Date of Decision: December 10, 2010 Baljinder Singh …..Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr. N.K. Sanghi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Rana, DAG, Haryana. Mr.P.K. Ganga, Advocate for the complainant. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Petitioner seeks the concession of pre-arrest bail in a case registered at the instance of complainant Balkaran Singh alleging that the petitioner who is working as R.M.P. had given two Penicillin injections and one seductive injection to the brother of complainant, namely, Gurpreet Singh. The description of the injections administered was not told by the Crl. Misc. No. M-34256 of 2010 [2] petitioner. The case of the prosecution is that on account of drug reaction, the leg of Gurpreet Singh had to be amputated. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that no evidence has been gathered during the course of investigation by the investigating agency indicating that the petitioner had administered penicillin injections. On behalf of the petitioner it is claimed that the reaction of the penicillin does not result in the consequences which have been suffered by Gurpreet Singh. Counsel for the petitioner submits that offences under Section 326 and 328 IPC are not made, in any manner, against the petitioner. I have heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the complainant as well as State counsel and gone through the police file. The petitioner is reported to be running a medical clinic as R.M.P. on the basis of a Diploma issued by State Council of Ayurvedic and Yunani Medicines. The evidence has been collected regarding Gurpreet Singh having been given two injections on the arm and left thigh. Prima facie, the treatment was initially given by the petitioner. There is sufficient medical evidence available on the record indicating that on account of the injections administered the complainant’s brother had go undergo amputation of the leg. It will be premature to express any opinion at this stage whether the amputation is the direct result of the injections administered by the petitioner. No extra-ordinary exceptional circumstances seem to exist in this case to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail. Dismissed. Crl. Misc. No. M-34256 of 2010 [3] December 10, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE