CRM-M No.16763 of 2009 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.16763 of 2009 Date of Decision: 21.8.2009 Amarjit Singh alias Babbo and others ..Petitioners. Vs. State of Punjab ..Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present : Mr.P.S.Ahluwalia, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Ranbir Singh Rawat, AAG Punjab for the State/respondent. Mr.Ram Bilas Gupta, Advocate for the complainant. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case registered vide FIR No.100 dated 2.5.2009 under Sections 323, 324, 427, 148, 149 IPC (Section 326 IPC was added later on) at Police Station Divn.No.8, Jalandhar. The aforesaid FIR was registered on the statement of Tarandeep Singh, who has alleged that on 1.5.2009 at about 10 P.M. after closing his shop, he was going with Sanjay on his Hero Honda motor-cycle. While they were standing near a park in Sodal Mohalla, Babbo, Himmat, Toffy and two other boys came there. Mittal and Bhidi were also accompanying them. Himmat gave Daat blow on his head which hit him on his left ear and Babbo who was armed with Kirpan gave a blow which hit on his left flank, Toffy gave Datar blow which fell on his right hand. Himmat again gave him Daat blow which fell on his back. Bhidi raised Lalkara and gave a Datar blow CRM-M No.16763 of 2009 -2- which hit on his back. All the aforesaid persons kept on inflicting injuries when he fell on the ground. They also inflicted injuries to Sanjay, who tried to save him. They also damaged his motor cycle and an amount of Rs.10,000/- which was collected during sale and a gold chain were also lost. All the four accused applied for anticipatory bail before the Court below which was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar on 10.6.2009. Counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that initially the petitioners had surrendered before the police and were released on bail on 7.5.2009. The weapons were also recovered. Later on Section 326 IPC was added. Injuries on the persons of Rajinder and Gaurav were declared to be simple in nature whereas injuries on the person of complainant Tarandeep Singh and Sanjay were declared to be grievous. It is alleged that injury suffered by Sanjay on little finger can be self inflicted whereas only one injury i.e. incised wound horizontally over the lower part of occipetal region and upper part of the neck was found to be grievous. It is next argued by the counsel for the petitioners that the complainant is a known bad element of the area against whom many cases have been registered. Counsel for the State, assisted by counsel for the complainant, has argued that the injury suffered by Sanjay on his little finger cannot be self inflicted because the finger has been chopped off and the injury on the person of Tarandeep Singh (complainant) is caused with a sharp-edged weapon. It is also alleged that the offence committed by the petitioners is of serious nature. After hearing the counsel for the parties and considering the nature of injuries, which have been caused by the petitioners to the CRM-M No.16763 of 2009 -3- complainant as well as to Sanjay, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and as such, the petition is hereby dismissed. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) 21.8.2009 Judge Meenu