In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-886 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:23.3.2009 Pawan Kumar .....Petitioner v. State of Haryana .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Ram Pal Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ajay Singh Ghangas, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent-State. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offences under Sections 302 and 307 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The FIR has been registered on the statement of Vikram Singh son of Hari Singh. It is stated by the complainant-Vikram Singh that on 6.5.2008 he and his nephew Jai Bhagwan and his younger brother Vinod Kumar came to Village Naya Bans, Police Station Ganaur to attend the marriage of grand-son of the father's sister (Bua) of the complainant-Vikram Singh. Pawan Kumar (petitioner) and Dharampal (non-petitioner) also came to attend the said marriage. Pawan (petitioner) also has relations in that family. At about 2.00 p.m. an altercation occurred between Pawan and Jai Bhagwan (deceased) but the matter was settled. At about 8.00 p.m. Ghurchari was started. When the procession reached near the pond then due to the earlier grudge, Dharampal (non-petitioner) abused Jai Bhgwan Cr. Misc. No.M-886 of 2009 [2] (deceased) and asked Pawan (petitioner) to fire at him. On that, Pawan (petitioner) fired a shot with a licensed revolver aiming at Jai Bhagwan which hit below his lips. Pawan fired another shot aiming at the complaint but he escaped. Jai Bhagwan, nephew of the complainant fell down after receiving fire arm injury. When the complainant was taking care of his nephew at that time Pawan escaped from the spot along with his revolver. The complainant and other two or four persons took Jai Bhagwan for treatment but he died due to fire arm shot. The nephew of the complainant had been murdered by Pawan (petitioner) and Dharampal (non-petitioner) due to prior grudge. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the statement of Vikram Singh-complainant who appeared as PW-2. Besides, he has referred to the statement of Vinod Kumar (PW-3). In both these statements the prosecution witnesses Vikram Singh (PW-2) and Vinod Kumar (PW-3) have resiled from their statements that were given earlier. Pawan Kumar (petitioner), it is stated had not fired any shot on him (complainant) or his nephew Jai Bhagwan. He was declared hostile and cross-examined. Similarly Vinod Kumar (PW-3) did not support the prosecution case and he was declared hostile. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the petitioner had fired at Jai Bhagwan and the revolver recovered from him was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory with the cartridges that were fired. It is submitted that the FSL report dated 27.5.2008 has been received in which opinion has been given that the .32” bore revolver recovered from the petitioner was used in the occurrence and it is the same from which the fired cartridge cases marked C/1, C/2 and .32” fired bullet marked BC/1 had been Cr. Misc. No.M-886 of 2009 [3] fired from the .32” bore revolver marked W/1 and not from any other firearm even if of same make and bore/calibre, because every firearm has got its own individual characteristic marks. Therefore, it may be noticed that the incident had occurred in a marriage party in which the petitioner had taken out his revolver and fired on the lips of Jai Bhagwan. The revolver used in the incident has been recovered from the petitioner and the FSL report corroborates the fire arm shot with the recovery of bullets that were used in the occurrence. The trial in the case is going on. Four witnesses have been examined and ten remain to be examined. The case is now fixed for tomorrow i.e. 24.3.2009. Keeping in view the nature of the offences and the evidence on record, no ground for grant of concession of bail is made out. The criminal miscellaneous petition is accordingly dismissed. March 23, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*