Crl. Misc. No. M-36893 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : Crl. Misc. No. M-36893 of 2011 Date of Decision : December 22, 2011 Amrik Singh @ Vicky .... Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana .... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. Arvind Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Kumar, DAG, Haryana. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : Accused Amrik Singh @ Vicky has filed this petition for anticipatory bail in case FIR No.125 dated 07.08.2011, under Sections 394, 427, 447 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short – IPC), registered at Police Station Saha, District Ambala. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. According to the prosecution version, complainant, who is a widow, was residing elsewhere and her house in her parental village was Crl. Misc. No. M-36893 of 2011 2 demolished in her absence by the petitioner and other co-accused and her articles lying therein were stolen. Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the petitioner's father is owner in possession of his house, of which the disputed property is a part. However, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Jagat Singh, stated that during investigation, eye-witness Amarjit Singh has made statement that complainant's house was demolished by the petitioner and his co-accused named in the FIR. In view of the aforesaid eye-version account and the fact that the house of the complainant stands demolished at the spot, but without meaning to express any opinion on merits of the case, the petitioner, in my opinion, does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. Dismissed. December 22, 2011 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE