IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. 47341 of 2009 in/and Crl. Misc. No. M-17763 of 2009(O/M). Date of Decision : September 18, 2009. Rajbir son of Partap Singh ...... Petitioner. Versus. State of Haryana ..... Respondent(s). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH. Present:- Mr. Jitender Dhanda, Advocate, for the applicant-petitioner. Mr. Ashok Kumar Jindal, A.A.G. Haryana, for non applicant/respondent-State. AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL). Crl. Misc. No. 47341 of 2009. Application allowed as prayed for. Annexure-P-2( F.S.L. report dated 30.01.2009), is taken on record. Crl. Misc. No. M-17763 of 2009. Counsel for the petitioner contends that as per investigation, which had been carried out by the prosecution and the challan, which had been presented before the Trial Court, only two bullets are stated to have been fired and both the bullets had been recovered from the dead body of the deceased. He further contends that as per F.S.L. report, the bullets which had been recovered from the dead body, had been fired from one pistol alone, that is, pistol chambered for .315 caliber cartridges. He on this basis contends that the petitioner, although, has been attributed to be armed with a gun, but the said gun had not been recovered from the petitioner. The allegations with regard to use of gun by the petitioner, is belied by F.S.L. report. He on this basis contends that the basic allegations against the petitioner, therefore, Criminal Misc. No. M-17763 of 2009. cannot stand in the light of F.S.L. report, which has been placed on record by prosecution itself. His further contention is that the gun, which had been used in the offence, had been recovered from the co-accused Kamal Singh and both the bullets were, therefore, fired by him. He on this basis submits that the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail. It is his further contention that the petitioner is in custody since 20.11.2008 and the trial is not likely to conclude soon. Counsel for the respondent-State, on the other hand, submits that the petitioner has been named in the F.I.R. Apart from the fact of using his gun, the allegations are that he had dragged the dead body. He further contends that the witnesses had also deposed about his presence and overt act of pulling the dead body. He, therefore, submits that the petitioner be not released on bail. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the case. The F.S.L. report speaks for itself, therefore, no reasons are required to be given on the merits of the case. However, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is in custody since November, 2008, and the trial is not likely to conclude soon, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail to the satisfaction of Trial Court. Any observations made hereinabove, shall have no bearing on the merits of the case before the Trial Court. (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE September 18, 2009. sjks. -2-