In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No.M- 15782 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 26.5.2010 Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.H.S.Gill, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Vivek Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. This petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 165 dated 28.10.2008 under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC” for short), registered at Police Station Sadar Kapurthala. The allegation against the petitioner in the FIR was that he had given a spade blow on the head of Didar Singh @ Guhla on the instigation of co-accused Ravinder Pal Singh, which had proved fatal. However, at the time of presentation of final report/challan, the petitioner was placed in column No.2 and it was averred that the fatal injury had been inflicted by co-accused Ravinder Pal Singh. Now the Criminal Misc. No.M- 15782 of 2010 (O&M) -2- petitioner has been summoned to face the trial as an accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there was only one injury on the person of deceased and the same was attributed to Ravinder Pal Singh at the time of presentation of challan. The petitioner is son of Ravinder Pal Singh and has been falsely involved in this case. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the present petition deserves dismissal. Although the petitioner was declared innocent during investigation, but he has been summoned to face trial under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The complainant in the FIR had attributed the head injury on the person of Didar Singh to the petitioner and while appearing in the witness box as PW-1, he has again deposed to the effect that the petitioner had caused head injury with spade on the person of Didar Singh, which had resulted in his death. Keeping in view the seriousness of offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, no ground for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE May 26, 2010 anita