Criminal Misc. No.M-4240 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Criminal Misc. No.M-4240 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision:13.02.2009 Narender Saharwa .....Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present:- Mr. Jitender Dhanda, Advocate for the petitioner. **** JUDGMENT HARBANS LAL, J. This petition has been moved by Narender Saharwa under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.216 dated 14.12.2007 registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 427, 506, 188 and 307 of the IPC at Police Station Tosham. This case was registered on the basis of the statement of Sunil son of Nand Ram, resident of Bhiwani stating that on 14.12.2007, at about 11:00 a.m., he along with Sujan son of Raghbir with driver Kamal by sitting in a vehicle were going to check Nakka. They reached near Nakka no.9 near Dadam road. Narender, the present petitioner, Vijayent, Bhambhu, Prem Punjabi Tosham, Rampal Bhatal, Ram Pal Khanak, Daljeet son of Inder Singh, Kuldeep son of Balwan along with other 10/15 persons, whose name he does not know alighted from the vehicle. Narender, the present petitioner, gave a kulhari blow on the complainant which hit on his head and told to teach him a lesson to provide help of Tehkadar Vedpal. Vijayent Criminal Misc. No.M-4240 of 2009 (O&M) -2- gave a Jaili blow on him, which hit on the wrist of his left hand. Prem Punjabi, gave a lathi blow which hit on the middle finger of his right hand. Rampal inflicted lathi blow on his head, Daljeet and Kuldeep gave lathi blows on his back. Rampal Bhatla gave legs blows to the complainant, who became unconscious and fell down. But for timely intervention of Kamal and Sujan, they would have caused more injuries to the complainant, who was brought by Dr. Krishan Kirawar to CHC Tosham, for treatment. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Obviously, head injury with kulhari has been attributed to the petitioner. This weapon of offence is to be got recovered from the petitioner. Thus, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. Consequently, no case is made out for admitting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this petition is dismissed. February 13, 2009 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE Whether to be referred to the Reporter? Yes/No