IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-13852 of 2011 DATE OF DECISION: May 16, 2011 Dilbagh Singh …..Petitioner versus State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr.S.S. Rangi, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Shilesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab .. RAJAN GUPTA, J.: (Oral) This is a petition under section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre-arrest bail in a case registered against the petitioner under sections 304/427 IPC vide FIR No.58 dated 11.4.2011 at police station Dakha, District Ludhaina. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that from the facts of the case at best offence under section 304A IPC would be made out which is bailable. According to him, Section 304 IPC has been wrongly invoked by the investigating agency and thus, the petitioner is entitled to concession of pre-arrest bail Learned State counsel has, however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that in the occurrence the bus struck against two cars resulting in death of 3 persons. According to him, complainant was infact in the bus and his brother is one of the deceased. He has referred to his statement wherein he has stated that he was sitting on the Crl.Misc.No.M-13852 of 2011 - 2 - single seat parallel to the seat of driver. Throughout he was apprehensive about the manner in which the vehicle was being driven. He intervened twice and asked the driver to drive properly, but he did not pay heed. When the bus was little short of Shekhupura, the driver of the bus struck the bus against Indigo car bearing No.PB-10DA-6988. The bus driver then suddenly turned the bus and hit a Verna car. The driver of Verna car tried his best to save from the bus, but the petitioner-bus driver kept on dragging the car to nearby fields. He thereafter opened the window of the bus and fled from the scene. The passengers thereafter got down and arranged ambulances to take the injured and deceased to the hospital. In view of nature of allegations, I am of the considered view that petitioner is not entitled to pre-arrest bail. Since the investigation of the case is still going on, it is not possible for this court to opine at this stage that the offence was solely under section 304A IPC. Dismissed. May 16, 2011 ( RAJAN GUPTA ) pc JUDGE 2