CRM-M-26630 of 2011 (O&M) - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M-26630 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:02.09.2011 Pawan Singh . . .Petitioner Versus State of Haryana . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.Robin Dutt, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J (ORAL) This is a petition for bail in a pending trial case registered vide FIR No.54 dated 30.05.2011 under Sections 308/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) at Police Station Jathlana, District Yamuna Nagar. The FIR is registered at the instance of Rajbir Singh, who has alleged that he is doing the business of sand and bajri. On the fateful day, when the occurrence took place, his driver of truck No.HR-45-A-6039 was carrying sand and bajri from Yamuna Nagar to Karnal. At about 11.30 PM, the persons sitting in car No.UK-07-G-0011 stopped the truck and started quarrelling with the driver and in that process he was given some injury due to which he was hospitalized but ultimately he succumbed to the injuries. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the car No.UK-07-G-0011 does not belong to him. However, in a supplementary statement the complainant has alleged that it was car No.UK-07-AG-0011 which was used in the occurrence, which of course belongs to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that he has been falsely implicated in this case because there is old rivalry between the parties. He further submits that the complainant initially mentioned car No.UK-07-G-0011 and then changed his stand by giving the number of his car in order to falsely implicate him and other members of his family. CRM-M-26630 of 2011 (O&M) - 2 - I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner but I am not impressed with the arguments raised because this case requires thorough investigation which is possible when the petitioner is taken into custody because it pertains to the death of a person. Insofar as the car number is concerned, the petitioner has failed to prove that some other car bearing No.UK-07-G-0011 is also in existence. In view thereof, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present petition is hereby dismissed. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) SEPTEMBER 02, 2011 JUDGE Vivek