Criminal Misc.-M No.29339 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No.29339 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 12th October, 2011 Gurpreet Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent Criminal Misc.-M No.30277 of 2011 (O&M) Iqbal Singh @ Bala and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr.S.S.Swaich Advocate for the petitioner in Criminal Misc.-M No. 29339 of 2011. Mr.Bikramjit S. Pannu,Advocate for the petitoners in Criminal Misc.- M No. 30277 of 2011. Mr.P.S.Bajwa, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr.Navkiran Singh Advocate for the complainant. . . . . Rajesh Bindal, J. This order will dispose of two petitions bearing Criminal Misc.-M No.29339 of 2011 and Criminal Misc.-M No.30277 of 2011. Prayer in the present petitions is for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners herein, who have been summoned to face trial, on an application filed by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are not specifically named in the FIR and they were named in the supplementary statement recorded after 12 days of the incident. Thereafter, the complainant in the court had alleged that the petitioners were also accompanying other co-accused when the deceased had been given beatings at the residence of Baljit Singh. It is further submitted that the petitioners Criminal Misc.-M No.29339 of 2011 (O&M) 2 have been falsely implicated as they are close relatives of Baljit Singh. They are not even resident of the same village. Their presence at the spot is highly doubtful. The investigation has already been completed, trial is on and at this stage, the custody of the petitioners is not required otherwise, they will face trial. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as counsel for the complainant submitted that in the supplementary statement, the petitioners have been specifically named. They have been attributed active roles in the entire incident in which Kulwinder Singh died on account of multiple injuries suffered by him. Therefore, the petitioners do not deserve concession of pre-arrest bail. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the petitioners were not specifically named in the FIR, their names were disclosed after 12 days of the incident in the supplementary statement in the investigation of the cross-version as well as in the statement recorded in the court where the complainant stated that the petitioners were also present when beatings were being given to Kulwinder Singh at the residence of Baljit Singh who ultimately expired whereas, some of the persons were specifically named in the FIR, in my opinion, the petitioners are not required to be taken into custody for interrogation. The petitioners are directed to appear before the court below on the date already fixed i.e. 21.10.2011 and furnish their bail bonds. The petitions stand disposed of. (Rajesh Bindal) 12.10.2011. Judge Seema-II