IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.71327-M of 2006 DATE OF DECISION:15.12.2006 Karamjit Singh ..........Petitioner Versus U.T., Chandigarh ..........Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Shri SPS Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Hemant Bassi, Advocate for U.T., Chandigarh. Shri J.S. Virk, Advocate for the complainant. **** Petitioner Karamjit Singh apprehending his arrest in a non- bailable offence in case FIR No. 71 dated 3.3.2005 under Sections 147/148/149/323/307/325/326 IPC, registered at Police Station Mani Majra, U.T., Chandigarh has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail. I have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the contents of the FIR. Counsel for the petitioner contends that initially the petitioner was not named in the aforesaid FIR, though subsequently in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the petitioner was attributed one injury on the head of Dharamveer. Counsel for the petitioner, while referring to the affidavits Annexures P-2 to P-6, including the complainant as well as the injured Dharamveer, states that the petitioner was not the person who caused injury to Dharamveer. On the basis of these affidavits, counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was wrongly named in the FIR. Crl. Misc. No.71327-M of 2006 -2- Counsel for the petitioner further contends that in view of the order dated 17.11.2006, the petitioner has joined the investigation. Counsel for the U.T., Chandigarh on instructions from Narinder Pal, SI does not dispute this fact. Counsel for the complainant, who is also present in the Court, has acknowledged that the affidavits Annexures P-2 and P-6 have been issued by the injured and witnesses. In view of the above, the interim bail, granted vide order dated 17.11.2006 is made absolute subject to the same terms and conditions. Disposed of accordingly. December 15, 2006 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) pooja JUDGE