CRM No. M-32418 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-32418 of 2008 Date of decision: 18.02.2009 Dinesh Kumar @ Pabbu ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. S.S. Majithia, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab. Rajan Gupta, J. This is a petition for grant of regular bail in a case registered against the petitioner under Sections 302, 148 & 149 IPC at Police Station Payal, District Ludhiana, vide FIR No.199 dated 10th July, 2006. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is in custody for quite some time and trial will take long time to conclude. The counsel has also contended that co-accused namely, Ravipal and Amandeep Singh alias Shelly have already been granted bail by this Court. Learned counsel for the State has, however, opposed the bail application on the ground that the petitioner is the main accused as he inflicted the fatal injury by giving a Kirch blow to son of the complainant namely, Amrinder Singh alias Gandhi resulting in his death. According to the State counsel, in case the petitioner is released CRM No. M-32418 of 2008 2 on bail, he is likely to tamper with the evidence and influence the witnesses. After hearing the counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is not entitled to grant of bail pending trial. The case of Ravipal and Amandeep Singh alias Shelly co-accused were on a different footing. While Ravi Pal was not named by the complainant in the FIR, the only role attributed to Amandeep Singh alias Shelly was that he caught hold of arms of the deceased. On the other hand, the role attributed to the petitioner is that he took the deceased for a walk and on the way gave a Kirch blow in his back while other accused caught hold of the deceased. As a result of this, the deceased fell down whereafter he got up and ran for some distance. He was later on taken to the hospital. However, he died on the way to the hospital. Keeping in view the seriousness of allegations against the petitioner, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail pending trial. The apprehension of the prosecution that the petitioner may influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence, is also not without any basis. In view of the above discussion, this petition for grant of regular bail is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE February 18, 2009 'rajpal'