IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.No.M-15277 of 2011 Date of Decision : May 18, 2011. Ravinder .....Petitioner versus State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mrs.Sharmila Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.94 dated 15.4.2011 registered at Police Station Murthal, District Sonepat under Sections 323/324/307/406/34 IPC read with Sections 25/54/59 of the Arms Act. As per the allegations in the FIR, the petitioner fired at the victim with a pistol. Relying upon the medical report dated 14.5.2001 of the victim given by PGIMS, Rohtak and a resolution alleged to have been passed by the Gram Panchayat and other respectables, it is urged on behalf of the petitioner that no fire arm was ever used. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the medico-legal report dated 14.5.2011 (Annexure P-8), Crl.Misc.No.M-15277 of 2011 [2] which does suggest the presence of some pellets, it may not be expedient for this Court to outrightly accept the plea of the petitioner that no fire arm was used, though the contention raised in this regard would require consideration by the Court at an appropriate stage. However, owing to the gravity of offence, I do not find it a fit case to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. It is directed that in case the petitioner surrenders and thereafter seeks regular bail, his application shall be expeditiously disposed of especially keeping in view the fact that genesis of the controversy lies in a land dispute. May 18, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE