In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-11541 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:29.4.2010 Manjit Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.P.S. Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him for the offences under Sections 452, 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC. The FIR in the case has been registered on the statement of Roop Singh. In the incident that occurred on 16.9.2009 at about 2.40 p.m. the petitioner it is alleged gave a ‘Kirpan’ blow on the forehead of the complainant-Roop Singh. Besides, he gave two blows with the reverse side of ‘Kirpan’ on the head of the complainant. In terms of the medical report of Roop Singh, ten injuries were found on his person but all have been opined to be simple in nature. The same include the injuries attributed to the petitioner as well. From the side of the petitioner, eight persons have suffered injuries. The petitioner, it is submitted, was not present at the spot Cr. Misc. No.M-11541 of 2010 [2] and this is evident from the fact that he did not receive any injury in the incident that occurred. In fact the petitioner is in the army and he is being implicated only because he is a serving official in the army. Otherwise from the side of the petitioners there are others who received injuries like Jarnail Singh, Pushpa Devi, Karan Singh, Pargat Singh, Sandhya Devi, Sekhar Singh, Suraksha Rani and Baba Singh. The Photostat copies of the medical reports of the said injured have been submitted in Court and are taken on record. It may, indeed be noticed that no injury in the incident was suffered by the petitioner. Therefore, the possibility that he was not present at the time of the incident cannot be entirely ruled out. This aspect, however, is to be considered and gone into by the investigating agency or the Court, as the case may be and is not to be gone into at this stage. It may also be noticed that out of the eight accused from the side of the petitioner, five have been granted the concession of pre arrest bail and two are in custody. In the afore-noticed facts and circumstances, the petitioner in the event of his arrest shall be admitted to bail subject to his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called and shall abide by the conditions as provided in terms of Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 3.5.2010 at 10.00 a.m. and continue to do so thereafter as and when called. The criminal miscellaneous petition stands disposed of. April 29, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*