In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Crl. Misc. No. M-2717 of 2009 Date of decision: March, 06, 2009 Harjinder Singh @ Rana ... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab ... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. A.K. Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajesh Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G. Punjab. A.N. Jindal, J The FIR was registered on the statement of Nachhattar Singh, who disclosed that on 16.5.2007, at about 8.30 p.m. when he reached near the bus stand Mehlan Road Khadial, he saw that Ran Singh alias Rana son of Bant Singh and Gurpreet Singh son of Gurcharan Singh were pulling the rope on the either side. Thereafter, Lalli son of Gurcharan Singh caused injuries to Ranjit Singh @ Rana with a stick. In the meanwhile, a lalkara was raised by Nachhattar Singh, then Gurcharan Singh son of Jangir Singh, Gurdev Singh son of Phuman Singh, both armed with .12 bore gun and Janta Singh son of Maghar Singh armed with soti appeared at the scene. Janta Singh raised lalkara, on this Harjinder Singh @ Rana fired shots in the air. Gurcharan Singh and Raj Singh fired shots at Nachhattar Singh and Gurmail Singh causing them injuries. It is a cross case in which Jagroop Singh also got registered a case against the complainant party for causing injuries to them, but in his statement recorded earlier to the present FIR, presence of Harjinder Singh alias Rana was not recorded. However, the FIR recorded on the next day of occurrence by Nachhattar Singh, presence of Harjinder Singh alias Rana is recorded, however, no allegations have been levelled if he caused any injury to any person of the complainant party. Harjinder Singh alias Rana was arrested on 8.8.2007 and recovery of 7.65 bore revolver along with 6 live cartridges was effected and was sent to the Ballistic Expert but the report of Crl. Misc. No. M-2717 of 2009 -2- *** the Ballistic expert does not reveal if any fire was shot from the said pistol. The Investigating Officer did not recover any .32 bore pistol from him. Gurmail Singh one of the eye witnesses examined during trial did not name the petitioner as an assailant or a person accompanying the other accused. Further more I need not go into the report by Dr. Oberoi because cardiomegaly with hypertrophy could be due to the impact of grave injuries suffered by Gurcharan Singh at the hands of the other accused. In any case, admittedly, the petitioner has not caused any injuries and the question regarding common object with the other accused is still debatable. The petitioner is in custody since 8.8.2007. The trial is not likely to be concluded at an early date. Under the circumstances, the instant petition is allowed. Bail to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur. March 06, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge