CRM-M-26862-2011 (O&M) [ 1 ] :::::::: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-26862-2011 (O&M) Date of decision:02.11.2011 Ved Pal Tanwar ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sagar Deswal, AAG, Haryana. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a pending trial case registered vide FIR No.384 dated 13.06.2011, under Sections 148, 149, 188, 332, 353, 186, 147, 114, 506, 307 of IPC (Sections 147, 151, 152, 153-A, 153- AA, 153-B, 120-B and 304 of IPC added lateron) at Police Station Civil Lines, Hisar. The FIR is registered on the complaint of EHC Ramphal who was stated to be on duty at Police Station Civil Lines, Hisar on 13.06.2011 alongwith other police officials. As per the allegations, the District Magistrate, Hisar had imposed the restrictions of Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 [for short “Cr.P.C.”]. At about 12.30 p.m., the petitioner alongwith Varinder Bagoria and Shakti Singh led a procession of 400/500 men and women who were armed with lathis and stones, raising dirty slogans and abuses, moved toward New Secretariat, Hisar. The Magistrate allegedly reasoned with the petitioner that they cannot violate the provisions of Section 144 Cr.P.C. but they did not agree and started pelting stones. According to the complainant, Shakti Singh and Varinder Singh gave lathi blows to him. When he fell down, Hawa Singh also gave a lathi blow and Krishan Kumar hit him CRM-M-26862-2011 (O&M) [ 2 ] :::::::: with stone on his nose. The petitioner had applied for bail before the learned Court below but was dismissed vide his order dated 28.06.2011. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 20.06.2011 and the challan has been presented. He further submitted that the agitation was in favour of the sufferers of the Mirchpur. He further submits that two co-accused, namely Hawa Singh and Virender Singh, who are alleged to have caused simple hurt to the complainant, have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 10.08.2011 passed in CRM-M-21977-2011, whereas the petitioner has not caused any injury to anyone. While opposing the bail application of the petitioner, the learned State Counsel has submitted that the petitioner had instigated innocent people, who turned into a mob and took up arms at his instance despite the promulgation of Section 144 Cr.P.C. and the intervention of the civil administration. The agitated mob had broken the barricades and assaulted upon the police officials on duty by pelting stones and using dandas/lathis. He has also referred to a judgment of the Supreme Court reported as Destruction of Public and Private Properties, In Re Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others' (2009) 5 Supreme Court Cases 212. Besides the above, it is also submitted that the petitioner is habitual offender against whom many cases are pending, the details of which are as under: Sr. No. Particulars Present Status 1. FIR No.4 dated 6.1.2008, U/Ss 148/149/307 IPC, PS Tosham Under Trial 2. FIR No.254 dated 6.10.2008, U/Ss 147/149/283 IPC, PS Tosham Under Trial 3. FIR No.168 dated 13.8.08, U/Ss 306/34 IPC, PS Civil Lines, Bhiwani Under Trial 4. FIR No.146 dated 26.05.2009 U/Ss 147/148/283 IPC, PS Tosham Under Trial 5. FIR No.441 dated 30.08.2010, U/Ss 147/148/283/120-B IPC, PS Sadar Bhiwani Under Trial 6. FIR No.54 dated 11.03.2011, U/Ss 147/149/341 IPC & 3/3/84 of PPD Act, PS Uklana. Under investigation CRM-M-26862-2011 (O&M) [ 3 ] :::::::: Sr. No. Particulars Present Status 7. FIR No.62 dated 29.01.2011, U/s 342/506 IPC & SC & ST Act, PS Sadar, Hisar Under investigation 8. FIR No.171 dated 9.3.2011, U/Ss 3(1) 6-5 SC & ST Act, PS Sadar, Hisar Under investigation 9. FIR No.256 dated 08.04.2011, U/Ss 302, 148, 216, 147 IPC, PS Sadar, Hisar Under investigation 10. FIR No.384 dated 13.06.2011, U/Ss 307/147/148/149/188/332/353/186/114/50 6 IPC, PS Civil Lines, Hisar Under investigation He also submitted that although some of the accused in the Mirchpur incident have been convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi but still there are strong apprehensions that the petitioner may again instigate innocent people against those persons who have been acquitted and would become a threat to peace and serenity in the society, if released on bail. I have heard both the learned counsel for the parties, perused the available record and I am of the view that in the given facts and circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail at this stage because not even a single witness has been examined so far. Hence, the present petition is hereby dismissed. November 02, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE