In the Punjab and Haryana High Court, at Chandigarh. CRM-M- 22207 of 2011 Decided on Aug 12,2011 Ashok Kumar --Petitioner vs. State of Haryana --Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.Gorakh Nath, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr.Sagar Deswal, AAG,Haryana Rakesh Kumar Jain,J:(Oral) This is a petition for regular bail pending trial under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (for short, Cr.P.C.) in a case FIR No.236 dated 21.3.2011, under Sections 148,149,323,302,325,326 IPC and 25 of the Arms Act, at Police Station, City Karnal. The FIR is registered on the statement of Kanhaiya Lal, who has stated that they were three brothers. He is the eldest and next to him was Mohan (since deceased). It is alleged by him that on the fateful day, he was talking to Brij Lal son of Mannu Ram near the shop of Barber, where all the accused including the petitioner came. They were indulging in 'hardung baji' due to Holi ( Phaag). At that time, Mohan (deceased) who had purchased goods from the grocery store of Raj Kumar reached in front of the shop of Sanjay Barber, all the accused stopped him and tried to apply colour to him. On his resistance, a scuffle took place in which Deepak gave a rod blow on the head of the deceased and Meeta accused gave punch on his left eye. Thereafter, the remaining boys started giving fist blows to the CRM-M-22207 of 2011 -2- deceased. In the supplementary statement, Kanhaiya Lal stated that “Ashok Kumar son of Sadhu Ram, resident of Vakilpura, Sadar Bazar, Karnal was of course standing there but he had not caused any injury to Mohan and that his name was got mentioned under a misunderstanding (Galat fahmi). He might be discharged from the case”. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is in custody from 07.5.2011 and the challan has already been presented. There are 32 witnesses in all to be examined by the prosecution. He submits that other witnesses have not stated a word against the petitioner of his participation in the alleged crime in which deceased Mohan has lost his life. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions received from ASI Sukhpal, has stated that the petitioner has been named in the FIR and was armed with a danda, but he is not attributed any fatal injury except for slap and fist blows, as stated by the complainant and in his supplementary statement, he has stated that no injury was caused by the petitioner Ashok Kumar to the deceased Mohan. He also stated that the other witnesses have also not named the petitioner of causing injury. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case but without making any observations on the merit, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. August 12,2011 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge