IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.(M) No. 755 of 2011. Date of decision : 30.9.2011. ____________________________________________________________ Rajesh Kumar …Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh. . …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? For the Petitioner : Mr. N.K.Thakur, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Additional Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral). This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No. 86 of 2011 dated 10.8.2011, registered at Police Station, Baijnath, District Kangra, under Sections 341, 323, 506, 325, 307 and 34 IPC. The status report filed and the same has been perused. 2. It has been stated in the application that the case has been registered on the complaint of Sanjeev Kumar alleging therein that the complainant after closing his tea shop at Chadiar was going to his home at about 9.30 p.m. alongwith Raman. The petitioner along with other persons came in Alto car picked both of them and took the petitioner to Barkut. The petitioner for some time was made to sit __________________ 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ? 2 in the car and thereafter he was asked to come out. The petitioner and others gave beatings to complainant with danda as well as with fist and kick blows, as a result of which, the complainant sustained injuries. 3. It has been stated that the petitioner has joined the investigation and nothing is to be recovered from him. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The complainant had already appeared as a witness against the petitioner. The petitioner is further ready to join the investigation and furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this Court. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. The petitioner had earlier filed bail application which has been dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 17.9.2011. A prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 4. The bail application has been opposed by the learned Additional Advocate General on the basis of status report. It has been stated in the status report that the complainant has alleged that on 9.8.2011 at about 9.15 p.m. petitioner and others came in car No. HP-53-0549 and threatened that Raman had given statement in the Court against them. The complainant and Raman were made to sit in the car and they took them to Barkut. They took out the complainant and Raman outside the car, the petitioner threatened that he would kill them. Thereafter, they started beating the complainant and Raman with dandas which were kept in the car, as a result of which the complainant became unconscious. The complainant sustained injuries on his head, back, arm and eye. The complainant sustained seven 3 injuries on his person. He was referred to Rajindra Prasad Medical College, Tanda for treatment in view of serious injuries. Raman also sustained two injuries on his person. The complainant also got treatment at PGI, Chandigarh. The doctor has opined that the injuries No. 4, 5 and 6 were grievous and injuries No. 4 and 6 dangerous to life. The petitioner has handed over the danda which was allegedly used at the time of commission of offence alongwith car No. HP-53-0549 with documents. The bail application of petitioner and Vijay Kumar was dismissed on 17.9.2011. 5. It has come in the investigation that the petitioner with danda and Vijay Kumar and Sanjay Kumar gave beatings to the complainant and Raman. Sanjay Kumar was arrested on 1.9.2011. It has also come in the investigation that petitioner etc. had taken away umbrella, tiffin, `15,000/- and gold chain of the complainant. Vijay Kumar is yet to be arrested. In the status report, it has been stated that in last seven years about seven FIRs have been registered against the petitioner. Out of them, in three cases the petitioner has been acquitted and others are pending. A prayer has been made for dismissal of the application. 6. I have considered the arguments on both sides and have perused the police file. It emerges from the record that the petitioner had given severe beatings to the complainant and one Raman. The complainant was referred to Rajendra Prasad Medical College, Tanda and thereafter he got treatment at PGI, Chandigarh. The injuries on the person of the complainant are serious. The co-accused Vijay Kumar has not yet been arrested whereas Sanjay is in judicial custody. 4 It has come on record that in last seven years, seven cases have been registered against the petitioner under various provisions such as 379, 307, 325, 323, 506, 341, 147, 148 and 149 IPC. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is not entitled to indulgence of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. 7. The observations made in this judgment are for disposal of bail application only and the same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. September 30, 2011. (Kuldip Singh) (GR) Judge.