IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No. 30563 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: 18.10.2011 Raj Pal ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ..Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. A.S. Manaise, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Pannu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. …… RAJESH BINDAL, J. Prayer in the present petition is for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 74 dated 24.4.2011 registered under Sections 302, 314, 201, 148, 149 IPC at Police Station Dinanagar, District Gurdaspur. Later on, offence under Section 302 IPC was deleted and Section 304 IPC and Section 23 of the Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1994 were added. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. He is merely a Hakim practicing in rural area. He is not qualified and also does not have facility for carrying out abortion. He has been falsely implicated as the brother of the petitioner is a Press Reporter and he is helping the accused party for seeking legal remedies. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that the petitioner is practicing as RMP. Name of the petitioner was specifically disclosed by the husband of the deceased, who stated that the petitioner was brought to their house to carry out abortion as in an ultrasound test a female foetus was found. The couple already had a female girl child. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the allegations against the petitioner as disclosed by the husband of the deceased, in my opinion, no case for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner is made out. Dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 18.10.2011 sharmila