Cr.Misc. NO. M 3681 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Cr.Misc. NO. M 3681 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION 2.3.2009 Lahora Singh ......PETITIONER VERSUS State of Punjab ......RESPONDENTS PRESENT: Mr. KS Sidhu, Advocate Ms. Rajni Gupta, DAG, Pb Mr. AS. Manaise, Advocate M.M.S.BEDI,J. The petitioner seeks the concession of pre-arrest bail in a case registered at the instance of Gurdev Singh alleging that the petitioner armed with a sword accompanied by Nishan Singh, Nirmal Kaur and Darbara Singh had stopped the complainant and his brother Gurmel Singh from cutting a tree. Nirmal Kaur and Darbara Singh (non petitioner) caught hold of the complainant and the petitioner gave sword blow hitting the complainant on the shin of the left leg. Injury No.3 shown in the MLR of the complainant has been attributed to the petitioner, which is an incised wound 8 cm below the knee. The said injury has been described as a cut on the tibia. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner himself is an injured. Learned counsel for the complainant has intervened to contend that the injuries on the person of the petitioner are self inflicted injuries and that the petitioner has been attributed a grievous injury. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through Cr.Misc. NO. M 3681 of 2009 2 the police file very carefully. Originally the FIR was registered u/s 324/ 323 read with Section 34 IPC. Subsequently, on the basis of an injury attributed to the co-accused of the petitioner on the head of the complainant, offence u/s 308/326 IPC was added. The injury attributed to the petitioner has been declared as grievous on the basis of a cut, which is not apparently conspicuous in the skiagram. It will be a moot point during trial whether the said injury would fall within the definition of grievous injury. The petitioner having already joined the investigation and sword having already been recovered, he can be granted the concession of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the petition is allowed, interim order dated 16.2.2009 is hereby confirmed and it is ordered that in case of arrest of the petitioner, he will be admitted to bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to the condition that he will appear before the investigating officer as and when required by the police and will not tamper with evidence or hamper the investigation at any stage. The petitioner will not commit the similar offence of which he is accused of during the pendency of the trial. In case of any such eventuality, the prosecution/ complainant will be entitled to seek cancellation of bail. March 2 ,2009 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE