IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P.(M) No.41 of 2009 Decided on: February 02, 2009. Vijay Kumar …Petitioner. VERSUS State of Himachal Pradesh ….Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr Bhupinder Ahuja, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr Ankush Dass Sood, Addl.A.G. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral) This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in F.I.R.No.3/2008 dated 4.1.2008 registered at Police Station, Baijnath, District Kangra under Section 307 IPC. The status report has been filed. Heard and perused the record. 2. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioner is a permanent resident of village Deol, Tehsil Baijnath and is a respectable person of his area. There is no chance of the petitioner’s absconding or fleeing from justice Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes …2… in case he is released on bail. He earlier filed bail applications which were rejected on 11.3.2008 and 3.7.2008 by learned Addl. Sessions Judge(I), Kangra at Dharamshala. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds as per directions of this Court in case he is released on bail. The continuous detention of the petitioner is not necessary, investigation is complete and challan has already been presented in the Court. 3. The bail application has been opposed by Mr.Ankush Dass Sood, learned Additional Advocate General, who has submitted that the petitioner is involved in a serious case. The case has been registered on the basis of statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. of Sarwan Kumar who disclosed that on 4.1.2008 morning the petitioner gave beatings to his two children. The children narrated the incident when they returned home. The complainant asked Vijay Kumar why he gave beatings to his children who told the complainant that his children had eased in his fields. He all of a sudden came in rage and brought an axe from his room and attacked the petitioner with the intention to kill him. The petitioner gave one axe blow on his head and another axe blow of reverse side on his back. The injured was medically examined. On completion of the investigation challan was presented in the Court on 1.4.2008 and now the case is fixed on 6.3.2009 in the Court of learned Additional …3… Sessions Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamshala for consideration of charge. The learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamshala on 3.7.2008 and there is no change of circumstance. The petitioner is not entitled to bail in view of the gravity of offence. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. As per the prosecution case, the complainant went to the house of the petitioner on 4.1.2008 in the morning and asked him why he gave beatings to his children. The petitioner brought an axe from the room and attacked the complainant with axe blows and the injured sustained injuries on his person. As per MLC of the injured, injury No.1 is grievous in nature caused with sharp weapon. The injury No.1 is quite extensive. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner gave axe blow on the head. The injury No.1 caused by the petitioner on the person of the injured was dangerous to his life. The statements of the witnesses by way of evidence are yet to be recorded. The possibility cannot be ruled out that the petitioner may influence the prosecution witnesses. In the facts and circumstances of the case, at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled to bail. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. …4… 5. The observations made in the order shall not be construed as expression of opinion on the merits of the case. February 02, 2009 ( Kuldip Singh ) (soni) Vacation Judge