Cr.Misc. M 22439 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.Misc. M 22439 of 2011 Date of decision: 2.9.2011 Jafru petitioner vs State of Haryana respondent Present:- Mr. Surinder Dagar, Advocate Ms. Sushma Chopra, Addl.A.G.Hry Mr. Sarfraz Hussain, Advocate. M.M.S.BEDI, J. The petitioner seeks the concession of pre-arrest bail in a case registered at the instance of Islamudin - complainant alleging that the petitioner along with Sarun abused him. The allegation against the petitioner , as per FIR is that he had fired at the complainant hitting him below the knee. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on an inquiry conducted by DSP, on the basis of which S.P. Palwal had sent a communication to the SHO to the effect that no bullet was fired by Haroon or Jafru and only a brawl had taken place. The allegation of firing at the complainant was found to be false. I have considered the report prepared by the DSP and the communication of S.P. to SHO as well as the report of the Doctor regarding the injury on the knee of Islamudin. The Doctor has opined that Injury No.1 on the person of the complainant is a fire arm injury but no report has been given whether it was dangerous to life or not. The parallel report submitted Cr.Misc. M 22439 of 2011 2 by the DSP is based upon the reasoning that no person had stated before him that Haroon or Jafru were seen to have fired at the complainant. The report cannot be considered to be a final opinion regarding the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed. Since the injury on the knee of the complainant has been opined to be a fire arm injury, no ground is made out to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner;. Dismissed. Nothing mentioned in the order will prejudice the right of the petitioner to seek the concession of regular bail as the fire army injury is not declared to be a grievance injury. September 2 , 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE