Criminal Misc.-M No. 31314 of 2011 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No. 31314 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: 29.11.2011 Desh Raj ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ..Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Jitender Dhanda, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anmol Malik, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. …… RAJESH BINDAL, J. Prayer in the present petition is for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 423 dated 21.10.2010 registered under Sections 323/506/34/325/307 IPC at Police Station Sadar Palwal, District Palwal. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially the FIR was got registered under Sections 323/506/34 IPC. Later on, on receipt of x-ray report, offence under Section 325 IPC was added. The petitioner was arrested and released on regular bail by the learned court below. Nearly eight months after the incident, opinion of Board of Directors was taken and offence under Section 307 IPC was added. The injury, on account of which offence under Section 307 IPC was added, is attributed to Mahipal, who has already surrendered and is in custody. The petitioner and father-in-law of the complainant are real brothers. The dispute is pertaining to a plot in joint pos- session of the parties. No specific injury is attributed to the petitioner. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Ram Avtar, submitted that considering the fact that the injured re- mained admitted in differed hospitals for a period of about eight days and the injury is on her head. The petitioner being member of unlawful assembly, is Criminal Misc.-M No. 31314 of 2011 2 guilty of alleged offence. He does not deserve concession of pre-arrest bail. However, he did not dispute that Mahipal, to whom injury on the head of the complainant has been attributed, has been arrested on 26.11.2011. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that Mahipal, to whom injury on the head of the complainant has been attributed, is in custody; dispute is between the brothers and the cause of dis- pute is possession of a plot and that the petitioner has not been attributed any specific injury, in my opinion, the petitioner deserves concession of pre-ar- rest bail. He is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 06.12.2011 at 10.00 a.m. to join investigation and in case of arrest, he shall be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/In- vestigating Officer. He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called upon for further investigation. He shall also be bound by all the conditions as contained in Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. The petition stands disposed of. (RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE 29.11.2011 sharmila