Criminal Misc. No. M-6037 of 2011 1 Criminal Misc. No. M-7458 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 16.03.2011 Criminal Misc. No. M-6037 of 2011 Rajesh Kumar ....Petitioner V/s State of Haryana ....Respondent Criminal Misc. No. M-7458 of 2011 Vikram Singh ....Petitioner V/s State of Haryana ....Respondent BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate for the petitioner in Crl. Misc. No. M-6037 of 2011. Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner in Crl. Misc. No. M-7458 of 2011. Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose of aforementioned two petitions filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail in a case registered against the petitioners vide FIR No. 271 dated 28.12.2010 under Sections 323, 324, 325, 326, 341 & 148/149 IPC at Police Station Kurukshetra University, Kuruskshetra. Criminal Misc. No. M-6037 of 2011 2 Criminal Misc. No. M-7458 of 2011 Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that petitioners have no concern with the alleged occurrence and have been implicated due to factionalism in the village. He, thus, submits that petitioners are entitled to pre-arrest bail. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. The FIR was lodged on the statement of Randhir Singh who stated that on 21.12.2010, he along with Suresh, Brijesh and one boy of the village was playing cards. At that time there was a quarrel between Suresh and Brijesh. Some days thereafter i.e. on 27.12.2010 when he (complainant) was coming back from duty on his motorcycle, he was accosted by the accused at about 5.30 p.m. At that time, Balwinder Singh and Jitinder Singh were armed with swords and others with bindas. In the assault that took place, ten injuries were caused on the person of Randhir Singh, eight of which were declared grievous. The petitioners are alleged to have caused injuries with bindas. The injuries suffered by the injured Randhir Singh in the occurrence was fracture right ulna, fracture left ulna, fracture proximal phalanx little finger right hand, fracture proximal phalanx index finger right hand, fracture proximal phalanx left thumb, fracture right patella and right tibia and fracture lower end of left femur. In view of nature of injuries caused, I am of the considered view that petitioners are not entitled to concession of bail. The manner in which injuries have been inflicted resulting in multiple fractures, I am of the considered view that arming the petitioners with a protective order would be travesty of justice. On the other hand, their custodial interrogation is necessary for taking the investigation to its logical end Dismissed. March 16, 2011 (RAJAN GUPTA) Criminal Misc. No. M-6037 of 2011 3 Criminal Misc. No. M-7458 of 2011 Ajay JUDGE