Cr.Misc. NO. M 2942 of 2009(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Cr.Misc. NO. M 2942 of 2009(O&M) DATE OF DECISION 4.5.2009 Randhir Singh @ Dheera ......PETITIONER VERSUS State of Haryana ......RESPONDENTS PRESENT: Mr. Bs Rathee, Advocate Mr. SS Goripuria, DAG, Hry M.M.S.BEDI,J. The petitioner seeks the concession of regular bail in a case registered at the instance of Manjit alleging that after the death of her husband Rajinder Singhh, she had married with Sandip. She started staying with Sandip along with her two children at Rohtak. The family members of Sandip had hand over the custody of her children Deepak and Deepika through the police to the family members of her former husband Rajinder Singh. She had filed a petition in the High Court seeking the custody of the children, which was decided on 19.2.2007 permitting her to retain the children for five days in a week and for two days i.e Saturday and Sunday the children had to be sent to their grand parents. On the day of the occurrence, the complainant along with her husband Sandip, Kala, Ved Pal, Pardeep, Kuldip and Sandip(2) sons of Sandip's maternal uncle had hired a taxi from Rohtak to give the custody of the children to their grand mother. At about 2/2.30 PM, the children were handed over to Gaje Singh, resident of Dupedi through the police and left for Rohtak. While going back, Sandip had persuaded the complainant to go to village Dupedi Cr.Misc. NO. M 2942 of 2009(O&M) 2 for some time. When they had reached home, they were attacked by Pappu, Gaje Singh, Kartar Singh, Ajmer Singh, Krishan, Tejbir etc. The petitioner was a member of an unlawful assembly, armed with a jailly . He being a member of an unlawful assembly had caused injuries on the person of the complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the main accused has been granted the concession of bail. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the order of this court granting bail to Pappu. Pappu had been granted bail as a gun shot had been attributed to him on the person of the deceased but as a matter of fact there was no gun shot injury. On account of the said patent controversy he was granted bail. The case of the petitioner cannot be treated at par with his co-accused. The chances of tampering with the evidence cannot be ruled out in view of the seriousness of the crime. The petition is dismissed. May 4 ,2009 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE