IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-7535 of 2010 Date of Decision: April 01, 2010 Avtar Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. D.B. Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Rajni Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.148 dated 1.7.2009 under Sections 307, 506, 34 IPC registered with Police Station, Dina Nagar, District Gurdaspur. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that case of the petitioner would be no worse than that of Kehar Singh (co-accused) who has been allowed bail in so much as in the supplementary statement made on the same day, Crl. Misc. No. M-7535 of 2010 [2] Kehar Singh has been attributed one of the blows on the head. Name of Kehar Singh finds mention in the FIR. I have considered the contentions of the learned counsel. While dealing with the case of Kehar Singh, it is recorded that FIR does not refer to the role of Kehar Singh. Role of Kehar Singh in commission of offence was mentioned for the first time in supplementary statement, although the statement is by eye-witness. In this view of the matter, parity cannot be claimed by the petitioner with the case of Kehar Singh. So far as the role of the petitioner is concerned, he is alleged to have given both the injuries on the head of the injured. Learned counsel for the respondent- State, on instructions from Kedar Singh, Assistant Sub Inspector, states that Makhan Singh injured remained admitted in hospital as indoor patient for about three months. The petitioner was taken in custody only on 12.11.2009. Considering the custody period and the role ascribed to the petitioner, at this stage, no ground for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is made out. Crl. Misc. No. M-7535 of 2010 [3] The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) April 01, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?