Crl. Misc. No. M-880 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-880 of 2009 Date of decision: January 13, 2009 Gurpinder Brar …. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …. Respondent Present: Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh Senior Advocate with Mr. Harmanjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. *** S.S. SARON, J. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Girdhar, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the complainant. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case which was initially registered against him for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 148 and 149 IPC. Later offence under Section 308 IPC was added vide report No.18 dated 20.12.2008. The FIR in the case has been registered on the statement of Ashok Bathla complainant who is working as a Lecturer in GTB Engineering College, Crl. Misc. No. M-880 of 2009 [2] Chhapyan Wali in the Computer Department. It is alleged that on 17.12.2008 at about 8.45. a.m., the complainant along with Sachin Luna son of Sohan Lal Mahajan and Rohit Bathla son of Krishan Lal Bathla were going in the car of Krishan Lal father of Rohit Bathla to GTB Engineering College, Chhapyanwali. The complainant was driving the vehicle while Sohan Bathla was sitting on the front seat with the complainant and the other two were sitting on the rear seat. At about 9.00 a.m., when the car was near brick kiln of Prem Kumar on the defence road, a clean shaven boy stopped their car. The complainant slowed down the car. At that time suddenly the driver of another car brought his Accent car without number in the middle of the road. Four clean shaven boys came out of that car and stopped the car of the complainant forcibly. They were armed with rod, 'danda' and 'kirch'. After opening the window, the said boys brought out the complainant. In the car itself, they hit the complainant on his head with an ‘iron rod’. The blow hit him in the middle. The other boys hit him with a ‘danda’ on his right hand and with the rod hit him on the right foot. Three persons who were accompanying the complainant came out of the car. At that time, a person holding a 'kirch' told them that they should not interfere and while beating the complainant they said “in Muktsar you used to speak so much, now you speak out”. This clean shaven boy it was stated should be of the age of 24 years. He had never seen him before but could recognize him if he was brought before him. After Crl. Misc. No. M-880 of 2009 [3] causing injuries to the complainant, they sat in the car and from the defence road went to Sito Guno. Navdeep Kamal drove the car and took the injured complainant to Civil Hospital Malout where he was under treatment. The motive for the assault was that in May 2008, the complainant was on examination duty as Superintendent at Bhai Maha Singh College of Engineering and Technology, Kot Kapura road, Muktsar. He used to stop the students from copying. The complainant suspected that out of those boys or their friends had stopped his car and caused injuries to him. His statement was recorded, which was correct. He asked for action being taken. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is not named as an accused in the FIR. It is submitted that the case that was initially registered was for bailable offences. However, the Police have obtained a report dated 20.12.2001 (Annexure P1) wherein it is simply stated that possibility of injury No.1 on the person of the injured complainant to be dangerous to life cannot be ruled out. It is also submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation in pursuance of the interim order of bail dated 29.12.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Muktsar. It is submitted that the Accent car without number plate which had come on the defence road does not belong to the petitioner. It is further submitted that all the allegations that have been attributed to the petitioner are on the basis of suspicion inasmuch as the petitioner got his supplementary statement recorded Crl. Misc. No. M-880 of 2009 [4] on 21.12.2008 in which the petitioner is suspected to be one of the assailants. In response, learned counsel for the complainant has submitted a copy of the supplementary statement of the complainant recorded under Section 161 CrPC on 21.12.2008. It is inter alia stated in the supplementary statement of the complainant that apart from the others who caused injuries to the complainant, one of them was Gurpinder Singh Brar (petitioner) also who was armed with an iron rod and he inflicted a blow with an iron rod on his (complainant’s) head and toes. Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the complainant and also gone through the record. It may be noticed that the injury on the head of the complainant has been attributed to the petitioner with an iron rod. This has though come in the supplementary statement of the complainant which has been recorded on 21.12.2008, however, the complainant is a Lecturer in GTB Engineering College and he performed examination duty as Superintendent at Bhai Maha Singh College of Engineering and Technology, Kot Kapura Road, Muktsar in May 2008. At that time, according to the complainant, he had stopped the students from copying in the examination. Therefore, in the circumstances it cannot be said that the complainant would falsely involve the petitioner as one of the accused in case he indeed did not inflict the injury as has been alleged. Crl. Misc. No. M-880 of 2009 [5] It may also be noticed that in the medico-legal report (Annexure P2), injury No.1 is a lacerated wound of 5 x .5 cm on the parietal area of scalp and X-ray was advised for the said injury. In terms of the application (Annexure P1), the Police had sought an opinion whether injury No.1 on the head of the complainant is dangerous to life. On the said application, the doctor recorded; “possibility cannot be ruled out”. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there was no X-ray report for the doctor to come to the said conclusion. It may, however, be noticed that the offence that has been alleged is under Section 308 IPC which has been added on the basis of the said report (Annexure P1) given by the doctor. Besides, the matter is under investigation and the effect of the injury and its nature is to be considered by the Investigating Authority before final report (challan) is filed in the Court. Keeping in view the nature of allegations against the petitioner and the fact that the petitioner is attributed an injury on the head of the complainant with an ‘iron rod’ who is a Lecturer in the Engineering College, no ground for grant of pre-arrest bail is made out. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in the petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE January 13, 2009 amit