CRM No.M-28574 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-13.10.2010 Lucky alias Rakesh Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.A.S.Chahal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Shilesh Gupta, D.A.G. Punjab. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Having exercised his right of anticipatory bail and lost in the Court of Addl.Sessions Judge, petitioner Lucky alias Rakesh Kumar s/o Soma alias Som Lal, has directed the present petition for anticipatory bail in a case registered against him alongwith his other co-accused, vide FIR No.132 dated 18.8.2010 (Annexure P1) on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 148, 323, 324, 326, 452 and 506 read with section 149 IPC by the police of Police Station Garhshankar, Distt.Hoshiarpur, invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr.PC. 2. Notice of the petition was issued to the State. 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable assistance and after bestowal of thoughts over the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be allowed in this context. 4. The learned counsel has contended that as per birth certificate (Annexure P3), the petitioner was a juvenile at the time of commission of the alleged offences. Therefore, he cannot be sent to jail under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The factum of Annexure P3 is also acknowledged by the Investigating Officer. CRM No.M-28574 of 2010 2 5. What is not disputed here is that according to the prosecution that the petitioner inflicted simple injuries to the complainant, that too, on non-vital parts. The learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Nirmal Singh, has stated that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and he is no longer required for further interrogation at this stage. There is no history of previous involvement of the petitioner in any such case. 6. Therefore, taking into consideration the age of the petitioner and totality of other facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the case, he is entitled to anticipatory bail in the obtaining circumstances of the case. 7. Consequently, it is directed that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions that (i) he shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Agency as and when required; (ii) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer and (iii) he will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court. 8. Needless to mention that in case, the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of his bail, in this relevant connection. 13.10.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge