In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-9866 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:20.4.2009 Rajinder Singh alias Rinku .....Petitioner v. State of Haryana .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Chanakya Pandit, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The FIR (Annexure-P.1) has been registered on the statement of Krishan, who has alleged that he is working as C.T. Scan Technician with Alpha C.T. Scan Centre, Mohan Nagar Chowk, Kurukshetra for the last two months. Earlier to him Sunil and Mohinder used to work as PRO in the said centre. The doctor had removed them. Due to this Sunil and Mohinder were annoyed and were unhappy with the working of Krishan in the said centre. On 25.1.2009, at about 11.30 p.m. at night Mohinder along with his friend Rinku (petitioner) who is working in Apna Hospital entered the Alpha Hospital, where the complainant is working, in an inebriated condition. One Sikh person was also accompanying them whose name the complainant did not know but could identify if brought before him. On reaching the Alpha Hospital, where the complainant is working, Rinku (petitioner) started kicking and gave fist blows to the complainant. The complainant called Joginder, who was on duty with him and he tried to Cr. Misc. No.M-9866/2009 [2] rescue him (complainant) from Mohinder, Rinku and one unidentified Sikh gentleman. Rinku (petitioner) threatened to kill Krishan-complainant and Joginder, who had come to rescue him. In the meantime, Joginder tried to call the doctor over phone but could not get his number. Thereafter, Joginder said that Police was coming as he had called them. On hearing this, Rinku (petitioner) said that the complainant should not be in Kurukshetra from the following morning and he should leave the medical centre. He further said that if he saw Krishan-complainant the following morning then he would kill him. While going from there with an intention of theft he (petitioner) took the small bag of the complainant which was lying on the table and had Rs.10,000/- besides some documents. The complainant informed his employer Dr. Arun Sandhu. Thereafter, on 2.2.2009 at about 8.30 p.m. Rinku (petitioner) again came and threatened the complainant that he was still there and they would kill him. Rinku then ran away after threatening the complainant. He also threatened Joginder not to give statement/complaint against him otherwise he would have to face dire consequences. The complainant fearing for his life from Rinku and his friends submitted that legal action be taken. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the incident had occurred on 25.1.2009 at 11.30 p.m. and no FIR was registered and neither was the matter reported to the Police. Thereafter, the second incident occurred on 2.2.2009 and the FIR has been registered on 4.2.2009 i.e. two days after the alleged second incident. Therefore, it is submitted that the entire FIR has been framed in a manner to implicate the petitioner. Besides, it is submitted that the long delay shows that the entire case has been cooked up. It is also submitted that even though the petitioner is Cr. Misc. No.M-9866/2009 [3] alleged to have kicked the complainant and gave fist blows, however, no medico-legal examination of the complainant has been conducted which would show that the prosecution story is false. Besides, it is submitted that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has erred in dismissing the application for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the matter and find no merit in the same. The delay in the registration of FIR may be due to the reason that the incident may have been taken as trivial in nature from which it could be expected that the petitioner would not repeat. However, he repeated the same on 2.2.2009. Thereafter, also there may have occurred some delay which must have occurred due to some deliberations and consultation for the registration of the case. The fact may be noticed that the complainant has no enmity with the petitioner so as to falsely implicate him in the case and neither has any such enmity been alleged. Therefore, merely, because there is some delay in the registration of the FIR in the facts and circumstances is not to be considered and gone into at this stage. The manner in which the petitioner is stated to have gone and threatened the petitioner in the C.T. Scan Centre where the complainant was working is a circumstance which would not entitle the petitioner to the grant of pre-arrest bail. The fact that no medico-legal examination has been conducted is also not such a circumstance which would entitle the petitioner to the grant of concession of pre-arrest bail. The question regarding medical examination is a matter which is to be considered by the investigating agency and when the challan is filed, by the Court. This circumstance is not liable to be considered and gone into at this stage. The allegations as have been made are serious in nature and it cannot be said at this stage that the same are per Cr. Misc. No.M-9866/2009 [4] se false. It is well known that considerations governing the Court's decision on an application seeking pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. are materially different from that seeking post-arrest bail or for that matter even seeking suspension of sentence pending appeal before a higher Court. In a case where pre-arrest bail is sought the advantage of custodial interrogation of eliciting more and useful information and material is to be kept in view. Besides, the exercise of power to grant pre-arrest bail is somewhat extra-ordinary in character. In view of the above, there is no merit in this petition and the same is dismissed. April 20, 2009. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*