CRM-M-28449 of 2011 (O&M) - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M-28449 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:11.11.2011 Tej Parminder Singh @ Sonu . . .Petitioner Versus State of Punjab . . . Respondent ***** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN ***** Present: Mr.Balbir Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.A.S. Rai, DAG, Punjab. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. (ORAL) This is a petition for pre-arrest bail in a case registered vide FIR No.75 dated 31.08.2011 under Section 365/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) at Police Station Meharban Ludhiana. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been involved in this false case because he happened to be the son of Sarpanch Naseeb Singh and his mother was a member of Block Samiti who have supported the People Party of Punjab which is headed by Manpreet Singh Badal. In this regard, he has referred to a Newspaper Item (Annexure P-2) dated 30.5.2011. He further submits that even the allegations made in the FIR are contrary to the medical record as in the FIR the complainant has alleged that he was kidnapped at 4.00 P.M. on 28.8.2011 and was made to smell a cloth which was soaked in some medicine and thereafter he remained unconscious till he found himself on the bed of the hospital. He also submits that when he was unconscious, he was given kick blows on his back and having pain since then. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the medical reports Annexures P-7 & P-8 by way of CRM-57479 of 2011 according to which the petitioner was admitted in hospital on 30.8.2011 CRM-M-28449 of 2011 (O&M) - 2 - at 7.45 P.M. instead of 31.8.2011 at 11.00 A.M. and at that time his condition was stated to be stable as there was no drowsiness and there was no external mark of injury. He further submits that on 1.9.2011 he was discharged from the hospital on his own request and when he was admitted on 30.8.2011 he gave history of this case himself. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the positive case of the complainant is that he was kidnapped and released when he found himself in the hospital at 11.00 A.M. on 31.8.2011 and during this period he remained unconscious whereas medical report shows that he was already in hospital on 30.8.2011 then the question arises as to why he is giving a wrong date and time of his regaining consciousness. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the petitioner was kidnapped because there was a Panchayat convened to resolve the issue of rape and in order to put pressure upon the father of the complainant he was kidnapped by the petitioner along with other accomplices. Learned counsel for the State, however, on instructions received from ASI Satnam Singh, submits that in terms of the order passed by this Court on 28.9.2011, the petitioner has joined the investigation. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case but without making any observation on the merits, the order dated 28.9.2011 is hereby made absolute subject to the conditions already contained therein. Petition is disposed of. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) NOVEMBER 11, 2011 JUDGE Vivek