IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.M.P.(M) No.471 of 2011. Date of decision: 01.07.2011. Sunil Kumar … …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. … …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Dev Darshan Sud,J. Whether approved for reporting ?1No. For the Petitioner: Mr.B.C. Negi, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr.P.K. Sharma, Additional Advocate General with Ms.Shubh Mahajan, Deputy Advocate General. Dev Darshan Sud,J. The petitioner is in detention with respect to offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307 and 302 IPC, registered in FIR No.104/11, dated 7.5.2011 with Police Station Sadar Nahan, District Sirmaur. 2. Prior to filing of the present application, the petitioner had approached the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur at Nahan. This application was disposed of by the learned Court after taking into consideration the record of investigation. The learned Judge considered the fact that the petitioner was part of a 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement?yes. 2 unlawful assembly which ultimately rioted and caused the death of one Bunty Sharma. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record of the case. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the documents as submitted with this application, do not at all point to the complicity of the petitioner in any of the offences and that at the time when the altercation took place, he was not a part of the assembly. Rather he had also lodged a cross report in treating for injuries. 5. Learned Additional Advocate General had referred to the statement of Manu Khan who has given a vivid and graphic description of how the petitioner himself was a part of the unlawful assembly/mob which beat up the deceased and when asked to desist from these activities, even threaten this witness with dire consequences. He also states that this person had taken a danda from a hardware shop and joined the unlawful assembly. The deceased as also Manu Khan were attacked with dandas, knives, and iron rods. This was not one incident but a repeat of 3/4 incidents of the same day. In these circumstances, I do not find any merit in this application which is accordingly dismissed. July 1, 2011 (Dev Darshan Sud) (aks) Judge.