Crl. Misc. -M No. 31675 of 2010 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. -M No. 31675 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 1.9.2011 Chander ..Petitioner. Vs. Chattar Singh and others ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present : Mr. Surinder Gandhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Vermani, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Ajit Sihag, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 4. RAJESH BINDAL, J. Prayer in the present petition is for cancellation of bail granted to respondents No.1 to 4 by the learned Court below. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondents No.1 to 4 in the present case have been summoned to face trial inter alia under Section 3 (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the Act') and the learned Court below was not competent to grant bail to the accused under the aforesaid Act. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and also perusing the order passed by the learned court below, in my opinion, no case for interference is made out. It has been noticed by the learned Court below that for the same incident FIR No.155 dated 16.9.2006 was got registered by the petitioner wherein no allegations regarding the offence under the Act were made. In the complaint which was filed more than a month after the registration of FIR, the fact about the FIR was not mentioned. The explanation of the learned counsel for the petitioner to the same being that as the correct version was not recorded in the FIR, a private complaint was required to be filed, cannot be accepted as the factum of registration of FIR has not been mentioned by the petitioner in the complaint. Crl. Misc. -M No. 31675 of 2010 -2- Considering the aforesaid facts, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Court below. Dismissed. ( Rajesh Bindal ) 1.9.2011 Judge Meenu