CRM No. M-173 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-173 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.03.2009 Som Nath @ Somi ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Vikas Behl, Advocate, assisted by Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Sanjiv Pandey, Advocate for the complainant. Rajan Gupta, J. The petitioner has prayed for grant of regular bail in a case registered against him under Sections 307, 324, 427, 148, 149 & 120-B IPC at Police Station Garhshankar, District Hoshiarpur. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that no role has been attributed to the petitioner in the FIR. He has been arrested on the basis of suspicion. This apart, he has been arraigned as an accused on the basis of statement of a co-accused, which is inadmissible in evidence. He has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 30th November, 2008 and thus no useful purpose will be served by detaining the petitioner in custody during the pendency of trial. Learned counsel for the State has, however, vehemently CRM No. M-173 of 2009 2 opposed the bail on the ground that allegation against the petitioner is that he had given Supari for killing the complainant and his wife. According to the counsel, five serious injuries were caused to the complainant in the occurrence. One injury in the abdomen was declared dangerous to life. Learned counsel has further submitted that three of the accused are still absconding. He has referred to extra-judicial confession made by Harpal Singh alias Pala before Gurinder Singh, a retired Deputy Superintendent of Police in which the entire occurrence as well as role of the petitioner was narrated by him. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given careful thought to the facts of the case. The allegations in the FIR are that the complainant and his wife were attacked by 8/10 young boys at about 9.00 P.M. on 1st October, 2008 when they were about to sit in their car after attending a marriage. The boys were armed with Kirpans, baseballs etc. They charged towards the car and smashed the windshield and window panes thereof. In the occurrence, Kirpan blows were inflicted to the complainant as well as his wife. When the complainant and his wife tried to escape in their car, the side door of the car opened, due to which wife of the complainant fell down on the road. Keeping in view the allegations in the FIR and role of the accused, as described by the State counsel, I am of the considered view that petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. It is apparent that injuries inflicted on the person of the complainant Vinod Saini could CRM No. M-173 of 2009 3 have proved fatal but for timely medical intervention. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been arraigned as accused on the basis of inadmissible evidence i.e. confession of one Harpal Singh alias Pala in another case, is not relevant at this stage. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that the present petition for grant of regular bail is devoid of merit. The same is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE March 27, 2009 'rajpal'