Crl.M. No. M-1924 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M. No. M-1924 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 23.2.2011 ... Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi and another ................Petitioners vs. State of Punjab .................Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Ms. Amandeep Soni, Advocate for the petitioners Sh. A.S. Rai, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Sh. Arvind Thakur, Advocate for the complainant. ... K.C. Puri, J. Petition qua Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi – petitioner No.1 has already been dismissed vide order dated 25.1.2011. As per allegation of the prosecution, Kamaldeep Singh – petitioner No.2, mentioned as Harkamal Singh in the FIR, has given a punch blow on the eye of Salinder Singh, which injury was declared grievous in nature. According to the prosecution, he lost his eye sight due to the injury. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the Crl.M. No. M-1924 of 2011 -2- FIR no injury has been attributed to petitioner No.2 and only his presence has been shown. So, in these circumstances, petitioner No.2 is entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail. I have considered the said submission, but do not find any force in that submission. Salinder Singh - injured has given a specific version that petitioner No.2 gave a punch blow, resulting in grievous injury to his eye. So, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner No.2 is made out. Consequently, the petition stands dismissed, qua petitioner No.2 as well. ( K.C. Puri ) 23.2.2011 Judge chugh