Criminal Misc. No. M-6867 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Criminal Misc. No. M-6867 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision:10.03.2009 Chanchal Kumar .....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present:- Mr. Lakhbir S. Goraya, Advocate for the petitioner. **** JUDGMENT HARBANS LAL, J. This petition has been moved by Chanchal Kumar under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.125 dated 26.7.2008 registered under Sections 307/324/ 326/341/148/149 IPC at Police Station Civil Lines Batala, Police District Batala. The facts in brief are that Bindu and Manoj Kumar were going to bring medicines in the bazaar on 23.7.2008, when they neared the house of Babu Chela, then Krishna Devi empty handed, Mangal Das alias Chanchal Kumar (referring to the petitioner), Karan and Hans Raj armed with dattar each stopped them. Krishna Devi raised lalkara. The accused Mangal Das alias Chanchal Kumar gave three dattar blows, the accused Hans Raj delivered four dattar blows and Karan gave dattar blows on the skull of Bindu. On the basis of the statement of Bal Kishan, father of Bindu, the case was registered. Criminal Misc. No. M-6867 of 2009 (O&M) -2- I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the medico legal examination report does not correspond to the oral evidence and that being so, the petitioner may be admitted to anticipatory bail. I regret my inability to be one with him. As is borne out from allegations in the FIR, three head injuries with dattar have been attributed to the petitioner. In re: State Represented By the C.B.I v. Anil Sharma, 1997(4) Recent Criminal Reports (Criminal) 268 (SC), it has been held as under:- “We find force in the submission of the CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third-degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of Criminal Misc. No. M-6867 of 2009 (O&M) -3- disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.” The Court considering an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, must strike a balance between the rights of an accused and the duty and obligation conferred upon an investigating agency. The weapon of offence is yet to be recovered from the petitioner. The extra-ordinary jurisdiction conferred under Section 438 ibid is to be invoked in exceptional circumstances. Herein, no such case is made out. Thus taking into consideration the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, this petition stands dismissed. March 10, 2009 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE Whether to be referred to the Reporter? Yes/No