Crl. Misc. No. M-4721 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 17.02.2011 Mahabir ..Petitioner versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr.Jasdeep Singh Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. **** M ehinder S ingh S ullar, J. (Oral) Having exercised his right of anticipatory bail and lost before Sessions Judge, Sirsa, petitioner-Mahabir has preferred the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered against him alongwith his other co- accused, vide FIR No.259 dated 25.10.2010, on accusation of having committed the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, by the police of Police Station Sadar, Sirsa, invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr.PC. 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, going through the record with his valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant petition in this context. 3. What is not disputed here is that during the course of investigation, it revealed that petitioner-Mahabir picked up the khapa from the spot and inflicted blow with it on the head of Kulwant Singh, culminating into his death. As per the medical evidence, the deceased had suffered 14 injuries, which were caused by blunt weapon and there was only one incised wound on the skull of the deceased, which proved fatal. This injury is attributed to the petitioner. 4. So, taking into consideration the specific role attributed to the petitioner with regard to heinous offence of murder, to me, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail, in this regard. Crl. Misc. No. M-4721 of 2011 2 5. Moreover, the anticipatory bail is not to be granted as a matter of course in all cases. The grant or refusal of such bail depends on the variety of circumstances, the cumulative effect of which, should enter the judicial verdict. The power under Section 438 Cr.PC is to be exercised sparingly and in exceptional cases keeping into focus the facts and circumstances of each case. The order of anticipatory bail cannot be allowed to circumvent normal procedure of arrest and investigation of the police. The Court has also to see that the investigation is the province of the police and an order of anticipatory bail should not operate as an in- road into the statutory investigational power of the police, in exercising the judicial discretion in granting the anticipatory bail. The Court should not be unmindful of the difficulties likely to be faced by the investigating agency and the public interest likely to be affected thereby. 6. In the light of the aforesaid reasons and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial, the present petition for anticipatory bail, filed by the petitioner, is hereby dismissed, in the obtaining circumstances of the case. 7. Needless to state that, nothing observed, here-in-above, would reflect, in any manner, on merits of the case, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the instant petition. (Mehinder Singh Sullar) Judge February 17, 2011 AS