IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-25059 of 2010 Date of decision: 9.2.2011 Iqbal …. Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …. Respondent Present: Mr. Sarfraj Hussain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.S. Deol, Addl. A.G., Haryana. *** S.S. SARON, J. Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered against him on 10.2.2010 for the offences under Sections 148, 149, 186, 332, 333, 353, 307 and 427 IPC; besides, Section 25 of the Arms Act as also Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. The FIR in the case has been registered on the statement of Inspector Nand Ram who along with his companion employees were in a Government vehicle in front of the house of Iqbal (petitioner). They had gone to arrest petitioner in case FIR No.477 of 2009 for the offences under Sections 392 and 397 IPC; besides, Section 25 of the Arms Act. The petitioner on seeing the police party sent others to block them from arresting him. Besides, they pelted stones. The petitioner is alleged to have fired a straight shot with his country made pistol on Sh. Nathu Ram, ACP who saved CRM No. M-25059 of 2010 [2] himself by turning aside and the pellets hit on the right arm of the driver of ACP namely Prem Singh. It is alleged that the petitioner and his other associates duly armed with deadly weapons had attacked the police party with an intention to kill and had created hurdle in the official work. They damaged the Government vehicle. It is submitted that the police was wanting to falsely arrest the petitioner in FIR No.477 of 2009. The petitioner is absolutely innocent and the entire village had protested against the arrest of the petitioner. Besides, it is not disputed that the country made pistol which is said to have been fired by the petitioner has not been recovered. Therefore, no recovery has been effected from the petitioner. The other co-accused of the petitioner namely Irshad, Fajru, Niyaj Khan and Umar Mohammed have been granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh on 17.6.2010. The prosecution has cited 13 witnesses and 4 have been examined. The trial in the case is likely to take time. All the witnesses are officials witnesses and therefore, the petitioner is not likely to influence them. The petitioner is in custody since 27.4.2010. The injured Prem Singh who is the driver of ACP has since been discharged. In the facts and circumstances, the Crl. Misc. petition is allowed and the petitioner on his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistratre, Mewat at Nuh shall be admitted to bail. (S.S. SARON) February 9, 2011 JUDGE amit