Crl. Misc.No.M 17466 of 2010(O&M) #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc.No.M 17466 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision:-26.10.2010 Narender @ Bablu & Anr. ......Petitioners. Versus Birham Parkash & Anr. ......Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- Mr. Jai Veer Yadav, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Vinod S. Bhardwaj, Advocate for the respondent no.1-Complainant. Mr. M.S. Sindhu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for respondent no.2. *** JASWANT SINGH, J(ORAL) Crl. Misc.No.31196 of 2010 Allowed as prayed for. Crl. Misc.No.M 17380 of 2010 Petition under Section 438 Cr.PC is for grant of anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioners in complaint case bearing No.22 of 24.2.2010 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 325, 307, 452, 506 Crl. Misc.No.M 17466 of 2010(O&M) #2# and 34 of Indian Penal Code pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari. As per the allegations levelled in the FIR lodged by the complainant-injured Birham Parkash, the petitioners along with non- applicant co-accused were coming on a tractor and were passing in front of gate of the institution, namely, Somani Institute of Technology and Management(Engineering College). It is stated that there is a dispute with regard to the partition of the land between the co-sharers. It is further alleged that petitioner-Narinder gave a lalkara to co- accused Birender who was driving the tractor to finish of the complainant Birham Parkash, who is a security guard at the institute as he was trying to become a Chaudhary. Thereafter, it is alleged that petitioner-Narinder pushed Birham Parkash in front of the tractor whereupon Birender has run over his legs with his tractor thereby crushing his legs and thighs. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a cross version of the incident wherein the petitioner Narinder had also suffered injuries. He further refers to the MLR of Birham Parkash(P4) stating that the injuries are simple in nature. After hearing the counsel for the parties it is clear that the injured-complainant had suffered injuries at the hands of the petitioners-accused. Without expressing anything on the merits of the case and keeping in view the manner in which the injuries have been inflicted on the complainant no case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners Crl. Misc.No.M 17466 of 2010(O&M) #3# is made out. Dismissed. ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE 26th October, 2010 Vinay