IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. M. No.16363-M of 2010 Date of Decision:22.7.2010 Lakhwinder Singh @ Lucky .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Ashok Giri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G. Punjab. Mr. R.S. Athwal, Advocate for the complainant. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (Oral) The present petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.87 dated 17.5.2010 registered under Sections 452/354/323/341 IPC at Police Station Sadar Banga, District S.B.S. Nagar (Nawanshahar). Learned counsel for petitioner contends that all the offences are bailable except the offence under Section 452 IPC and that he has joined the investigation. No doubt, the petitioner was granted interim bail and pursuant to the same he has joined the investigation. However, upon notice learned counsel for the State appeared and brought to the notice of this Court on instructions that the complainant has received as many as 10 injuries and she remained admitted in the hospital for 7 days on account of the same. Moreover, the allegations in the FIR read as under: “the petitioner forcibly pushed the door and entered into the house of the complainant and immediately came inside. Thereafter, he caught hold the complainant from her breasts. When the complainant opposed to do so, he slapped her and caught her from hair and dragged her in the street. During this period, he gave legs blows and fists blow on her faces. The complainant received injuries on her knee, backside and other parts of the body on account of dragging and beatings.” Crl. M. No.16363-M of 2010 -2- Faced with the same, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are false and there was intimacy between the petitioner and the complainant. Be that as it may, it does not give right to the petitioner to enter into the house of the complainant forcibly and give beatings while dragging her out from the house to street till she was rescued by the passers bye. She suffered as many as 10 injuries and remained in the hospital for 7 days. In view of the circumstances explained above, concession of anticipatory bail cannot be extended to the petitioner. Dismissed. 22.7.2010 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE