Crl.M. No. M-25610 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M. No. M-25610 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 14.9.2010 ... Pawan Thakur @ Kaka ................Petitioner vs. State of Punjab .................Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Sh.Vipin Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner ... K.C. Puri, J. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been declared innocent and was summoned under section 319 Cr.P.C., so he is entitled to the concession of bail. As per the allegation, petitioner has given head injury. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the FIR the head injury is on the right side, whereas before the Court, the complainant has deposed that petitioner gave injury on the left side of the head. In the FIR itself, Ranjit Singh is also alleged to have caused injury on the right side of head of the complainant. So, the petitioner is entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail. He also relies upon the authority reported as Harinder Singh Sharma @ Balli vs. State Crl.M. No. M-25610 of 2010 -2- of Punjab 2009 (5) RCR (Criminal) 736. I have considered the said submission but do not find any force in that submission. As per the allegations in the FIR, petitioner has given injury on the head of the complainant with Kirpan. No exceptional circumstance for grant of anticipatory to the petitioner is made out. So, far as authority in Harinder Singh Sharma's case (Supra), is concerned, that is distinguishable to the facts of present case, as in that case, the Court had observed that there was no incriminating material against the petitioner. Consequently, the petition stands dismissed. ( K.C. Puri ) 14.9.2010 Judge chugh