IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-25966 of 2006 Date of decision : October 23, 2009 Gurpreet Singh ....Petitioner versus State of UT, Chandigarh ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. RS Ghuman, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Preet Pal Singh, Advocate for UT Chandigarh L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Gurpreet Singh has filed this petition for bail in case FIR No. 145 dated 12.6.2009 under section 307 IPC and under section 25 of Arms Act, Police Station Sector-36, Chandigarh. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. According to the prosecution version, on 7.6.2009 at about 11/11-15 PM, complainant Ajay Singh Sandhu alias Kobi along with Gurnam Jakhar was going in his Lancer car after taking coffee at a shop. While the complainant was taking out car from parking lot, a white coloured Innova vehicle came in front of the complainant's car at fast speed and stopped there. The petitioner who was driving the Innova stepped out of the car and stood in front of the complainant's car. The complainant and Gurnam Jakhar also came out of the car and asked the petitioner why he was blocking their way. The petitioner started abusing them and took out pistol and fired it at the complainant with intention to kill him. The bullet hit Criminal Misc. No. M-25966 of 2006 -2- right leg of the complainant. The complainant and Gurnam Jakhar got scared and boarded their car. The petitioner fired two shots from their backside but they escaped. On 12.6.2009, the complainant saw the petitioner at the coffee shop in white coloured Innova vehicle. The petitioner after talking with some persons went away. The complainant and Gurnam Jakhar who were present there then learnt the name of the petitioner and thereafter lodged FIR still apprehending threat to their life from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there has been delay of 5 days in lodging the FIR and at the time of treatment in private hospital, it was stated to be a case of accidental bullet injury. However, these circumstances do not affect the prosecution case at this stage because the complainant and Gurnam Jakhar were scared of the petitioner who caused bullet injury to the complainant without any rhyme or reason and the petitioner had also fired two other shots. There is also no reason why the complainant would falsely name the petitioner. On medico legal examination of the complainant, entry and exit wounds of the bullet were found on the right thigh of the complainant with burnt soft tissue muscle tear and profuse bleeding. In view of the aforesaid but without meaning to express any opinion on merits, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. Dismissed. ( L.N. Mittal ) October 23, 2009 Judge 'dalbir'