Crl. Misc. No. M – 3328 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- 1. Crl. Misc. No. M – 3328 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:- 17.3.2010 Dinesh ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent 2. Crl. Misc. No. M – 34661 of 2009 (O&M) Vikas ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present:- Mr. Gaurav Mohunta, Advocate, for the petitioner. (in Crl. Misc. No. M – 3328 of 2010) Mr. J.P.Dhull, Advocate, for the petitioner. (in Crl. Misc. No. M – 34661 of 2009) Ms. Shalini Attri, DAG, Haryana. Gurdev Singh, J (oral) The above noted petitions under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have been filed by Dinesh and Vikas - petitioners for releasing them on bail in FIR No. 157 dated 6.7.2009, registered under Sections 307, 120-B and 34 IPC and 25 of the Arms Act, in Police Station Pillu Khera, District Jind, Haryana. According to the petitioners they are innocent and no such offence is made out against them from the contents of the FIR, which was got registered against known persons. It was after six days of the occurrence that they were named by Suresh and Ram kesh injured, when their Crl. Misc. No. M – 3328 of 2010 (O&M) -2- statements were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Even their statements are silent as to which of the assailant caused the injuries. On 5.7.2009, a message was received in the Police Station from PPGH, Jind, that Suresh and Ramkesh were lying admitted in that hospital due to fire arm injuries and have been referred to PGIMS Rohtak, on 5.7.2009. Head Constable Ravinder accompanied by the police officials went to the hospital and collected the medico legal reports. On 6.7.2009, an information was received in the police station that both the injured have been admitted in the C.M.C Hospital, Hisar. ASI went to that place, who was informed that the injured were not fit to make their statements. It was disclosed by Zile Singh, father of Suresh injured that at about 8 / 8.30 PM near Taxi Stand of Pillu Khera, Mandi some boys fired on Suresh and Ram Kesh. In the course of investigation, statements of Suresh and Ram Kesh injured were recorded. In those statements they came out with the version that they were fired at by Dinesh and Varinder while they were in the car and at that time Parveen was also with them. None of the injured has named Vikas as the assailant. According to them he along with other accused had made a plan to kill them. Thus at the most it can be said that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he committed offence punishable under Section 120 B IPC. He was not with by the other accused, when the attempt was made on life of Suresh and Ram Kesh. Keeping in view these facts, the petition filed by Vikas – petitioner is allowed and he is admitted to bail subject to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jind. The petition filed by Dinesh has been pressed by learned counsel Crl. Misc. No. M – 3328 of 2010 (O&M) -3- for the petitioner on the ground that as per the report of FSL, the fire arm of this petitioner had misfired and as such it cannot be held that he caused injury to any of the injured. As per copy of F.S.L report, which has been placed on record, the sealed parcel containing cartridges recovered from the spot and fire arms recovered from the possession of the accused were sent to that Laboratory and it was reported that the empty cartridges alleged to have been recovered from the spot were fired from the fire arm alleged to have been recovered from the possession of Varinder – accused. It is also reported therein that two live cartridges alleged to have been recovered from the place of occurrence were misfired from the fire arm alleged to have been recovered from the possession of Dinesh. That may be so, but there are categorical statements of both the injured that the Dinesh – petitioner also fired at them with the help of the fire arm and they had received gun shot injuries. The evidence is not be interpreted meticulously, at this stage while deciding the bail application. These are reasonable grounds for believing Dinesh – petitioner committed the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. Keeping in view the gravity of the offence and the circumstances, in which the same was committed, no ground is made out for releasing this petitioner on bail. The petition filed by petitioner-Dinesh is, therefore, dismissed. March 19, 2010 (Gurdev Singh) tripti Judge