CrMPM No. 458 of 2008. 21.5.2008 Present: Mr. M.S.Chandel, Sr.Advocate with Mr. N.S.Chandel, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. Advocate General, for the State-respondent. CrMPM No. 458/08 This petition for grant of bail has been filed by the petitioner in respect of FIR No. 406/07 dated 26.9.2007 registered with Police Station Sadar, District Mandi for the offences punishable under Section 302, 342, 323, 325, 120B, 201, 147, 148, & 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Briefly stated the prosecution version is that one of the co-accused Ahalya Devi was married to Harish Kumar Chandel. One son, Himanshu, was born out of this wedlock. The relations between the husband and wife were strained. According to the prosecution, the child was living with his father but on 25.9.2007 Ahalya Devi went to the house of her husband Harish Kumar and in his absence, took the child with her. In the evening, Harish Kumar along his elder brother Kamal Kishore went to the parental house of Ahalya Devi at about 7 pm. Sahib Singh, Ahalya Devi, two wives of Sahib Singh and Parkash Chand were present there. - 2 - Harish Kumar asked Ahalya Devi to handover the child Himanshu to him. Parkash Chand took the child to another room in the house. Thereafter Parkash Chand went out side the house and bolted the main door from outside and thus Harish Kumar and Sahib Singh were confined inside the house along with other family members. The prosecution version further is that thereafter Parkash Chand contacted his friends Bhawani Singh, Suresh Kumar, Netra Singh, Tej Singh, Parvej Kumar, Anil Kumar and Murari Lal on his mobile phone and asked them to come to his house. After some time, all the aforesaid persons came to the house of Parkash Chand. Thereafter Parkash Chand opened the main door from outside and he along with other person entered the house and started hurling abuses at Kamal Kishore. When Kamal Kishore objected and asked them to stop abusing him, the petitioner Bhawani Singh caught hold of Kamal Kishore and three other persons namely, Parkash Chand, Diwan Chand and Suresh Kumar started beating him with Dandas. Harish Kumar tried to rescue his brother but to no avail. The other - 3 - accused who were not armed with dandas also gave fist and kick blows to Kamal Kishore till Kamal Kishore fell unconscious. Thereafter the accused persons wrapped Kamal Kishore in a blanket and took him to the hospital. On the way, they met a number of persons belong to the village of Harish Kumar who were coming to enquire about the whereabouts of Kamal Kishore and Harish Kumar. When Kamal Kishore was taken to the Zonal Hospital, Mandi, he was declared to be dead. Therefore, information was given to the police and the aforesaid case was registered against the accused persons. There are 11 accused in the case. All the accused except the petitioner and accused Parkash Chand, Suresh Kumar, Diwan Chand have been enlarged on bail. Now the present petition has been filed by the present petitioner. I have heard Shri M.S.Chandel, learned senior counsel for the accused/petitioner and Shri Vivek Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, for the respondent-State. - 4 - Shri M.S.Chandel, has urged that the entire prosecution story is a cooked up version and cannot be believed. He urges that it is the two brothers Harish Kumar and Kamal Kishore who came to the house of the accused and therefore it is clear that they were the assailants along with their co-villagers but a false case has been made out. It is also argued that the child was already in the custody of the mother and all these persons came there to forcibly takeaway the child. He further urges that seven accused have already been enlarged on bail and the role of the petitioner Bhawani Singh is the same as ascribed to the other seven persons enlarged on bail. It is further urged that the investigation is complete and according to Shri Chandel no case under Section 302 IPC is made out since no particular injury is shown to have caused the death. At this stage, it would not be appropriate to go into the merits of the case. The petitioner along with other co-accused is alleged to have committed an offence under Section 302 IPC. If the facts are correct then the offence committed is indeed grave. The - 5 - main question to be decided is whether the role of petitioner Bhawani Singh is like that of seven other accused who have been granted bail. I have gone through the entire record as well as the order of the learned trial Court. I find that there is something more attributable to petitioner Bhawani Singh then the seven persons who were enlarged on bail. The only common factor is that Bhawani Singh was also not armed with a danda. This may be true. However, the prosecution story is that it was Bhawani Singh who caught hold of the deceased and held him while three other co-accused Suresh Kumar, Parkash Chand and Diwan Chand inflicted blows of dandas on him. His case is not similar to the other seven persons who are alleged to have given only fist and kick blows. Keeping in view the nature of the offence and the allegations made in the petition, I do not feel that this is a fit case where bail can be granted to the petitioner. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. May 21, 2008 ( Deepak Gupta ), J. s. - 6 -