Criminal Misc.-M No. 24464 of 2011 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. -M No. 24464 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.8.2011 Ajay Singh and others .. Petitioners v. State of Punjab .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. J. S. Brar, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. ... Rajesh Bindal J. Prayer in the present petition is for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners in FIR No. 20 dated 4.6.2011, registered under Sections 307, 308, 324, 148, 149 IPC, Police Station, Taragarh, District Gurdaspur. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not been named in the FIR, as only two persons, i.e., Mana and Chhotu have been named. The reason of attack given in the FIR is that Mana was having a liquor vend in the area, whereas Raju, one of the injured, was bringing illicit liquor from outside and selling in that area. In the FIR, the allegation is that Chhotu gave a Datar blow on the head of Raj Singh alias Babu and Mana gave a Datar blow on the left leg of the complainant, i.e., Dalwinder Singh. Learned counsel submitted that there is no allegation in the FIR that un-named persons were carrying any weapon or caused any injury to anyone. In the supplementary statement of Raj Singh alias Babu, the petitioners have been named. Further, it is said that though it is alleged that Damandeep Singh was carrying a baseball bat Criminal Misc.-M No. 24464 of 2011 [2] with which he caused injury on the head of the complainant, whereas there was only one injury found on his head when the medico-legal examination was conducted, which is attributed to Chhotu. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that names of the petitioners were disclosed by Raj Singh in his supplementary statement attributing specific injury to Damandeep Singh. The injury after CT scan report was found to be grievous. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the petitioners were not named as such in the FIR; in the initial MLR, only one injury was found on the head which is specifically attributed to Chhotu in the FIR; after CT scan the said injury was found to be grievious in nature and no other injury was found on the head of Raj Singh, in my opinion, the petitioners deserve concession of pre-arrest bail. Let the petitioners join investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer on 5.9.2011 at 10.00 A.M. In case of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. They shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called upon for further investigation. They shall also be bound by all the conditions as contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The petition stands disposed of. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 25.8.2011 mk