Crl. Misc. No. M – 1964 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- Crl. Misc. No. M – 1964 of 2010 Date of decision:- 19.2.2010 Shokat ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present:- Mr. Sarfraj Hussain, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Paramjit Batta, Addl. A.G., Haryana. Gurdev Singh, J (oral) Heard. This petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by Shokat – petitioner for releasing him on bail in FIR No. 334 dated 13.9.2008 registered in Police Station Nuh, District Mewat, under Sections 307 and 34 IPC and 25 of the Arms Act and 3/8, 5/8, 2/8 of Punjab Prohibitor of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, on the grounds mentioned therein. This FIR was got registered by Satbir Singh-complainant. He narrated therein that on 12.9.2008 at about 10:30 PM, one vehicle make Bulero bearing registration No. HR-38L-2886 was seen coming at a very high speed from the side of Kurthla when he himself and Mohinder were standing near the shop of one Jaggi. A number of villagers were also standing at that place. About 20 days back some villagers had intercepted one truck loaded with beef. In order to stop the vehicle Balero, he with the help of the villagers created a blockade. Three persons were found sitting in the Bulero and when they tried to catch them, they fired at the complainant Crl. Misc. No. M – 1964 of 2010 -2- with an intention to kill him. None of the occupier of the vehicle was caught or arrested at the spot. The investigating agency is relying upon the statement of the driver of the vehicle, who during his interrogation, made a statement that it was the present petitioner, who fired at the villagers. The driver has also been arrayed as an accused. Such a disclosure made by him before the police is hit by Section 25 of the Evidence Act. The best for the investigating agency was to get the petitioner identified from the complainant and other eye-witnesses by holding Test Identification Parade in order to satisfy itself that it was the petitioner who had fired at the complainant/villagers. No such effort was made. The petitioner is stated to be coming in judicial custody and is no more required for further investigation. Keeping in view all the above said facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed. Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mewat. February 19, 2010 (Gurdev Singh) tripti Judge