IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-21122 of 2009 (O/M) Date of Decision : October 09, 2009. Surjit Singh .............Petitioner(s). Versus. State of Punjab ..... Respondent(s). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present:- Mr. Sandeep Chopra, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Aman Deep Singh Rai, A.A.G. Punjab, for respondent-State. Mr. Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate, for complainant. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). Counsel for the petitioner contends that in compliance of the order dated 04.08.2009, passed by this Court, the petitioner had joined the investigation and the recovery has also been effected. This fact is not disputed by counsel for respondent-State, on instructions from H.C. Karnail Singh, Police Station Sadar, Patiala. Counsel for respondent-State, however, contends that the co-accused Harjinder Singh has stated that the gun, which was used by him in the incident, was provided by the petitioner. On being questioned by this Court, counsel for respondent- State informs that Harjinder Singh is in judicial custody and no recovery of gun has been effected from him. Criminal Misc. No. M-21122 of 2009. In view of above fact, counsel for complainant vehemently opposes the grant of bail to the petitioner and contends that firearm had been used by the co-accused in the incident, and, therefore, the petitioner should not be granted concession of bail. I have heard counsel for the parties. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been attributed with a kirpan an injury which, although, is grievous, but on the hand, which is not a vital part of the body and further that the weapon of offence has now been recovered, the order dated 04.08.2009 is confirmed. However, the petitioner shall have to comply with the provisions of Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE October 09, 2009. sjks. -2-