Criminal Misc. No.M-34677 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-34677 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision : 22nd November, 2011 Shubham .... Petitioner Versus Union Territory Chandigarh .... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL. Present : Mr. Sandeep Gahlawat, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Ashima Mor, Additional Public Prosecutor for Union Territory Chandigarh. * * * * L.N.MITTAL, J. (ORAL) Crl. Misc. No.63303 of 2011 Allowed as prayed for. Crl. Misc. No.63302 of 2011 The application is allowed and Annexure P-7 to P-9 are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Main Case Shubham has filed instant petition for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in case FIR No.404 dated 28.10.2011 under Sections 323, 342, 365, 395, 427, 452, 506 and 120-B IPC read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Sector 39, UT Chandigarh. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. According to prosecution version, the petitioner and his co- Criminal Misc. No.M-34677 of 2011 (O&M) -2- accused demolished the house of the complainant, abducted the complainant and also took away the complainant's articles. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the petitioner is juvenile, his date of birth being 09.04.1996. Prima facie the contention cannot be accepted at this stage. Along with the petition, the petitioner produced birth certificate Annexure P-2 mentioning the name of the petitioner as Shubham and his date of birth as 09.04.1996. Now the petitioner has placed on record another birth certificate Annexure P-7 mentioning the name of the child as Ashu. Both the birth certificates mention same registration number of the birth entry but mention different names of the child as Shubham in Annexure P-2 and as Ashu in Annexure P-7. The petitioner tried to explain the same by submitting that birth certificate Annexure P-2 did not mention the name of the child when issued initially and it was filled in later on by the petitioner's father. The explanation cannot be accepted at this stage because the petitioner tried to pass on certificate Annexure P-2 as genuine certificate mentioning the name of the petitioner and his date of birth, but it appears that the correct certificate is Annexure P-7 mentioning the name of the child as Ashu and not as Shubham. The contention that Shubham is Ashu by nick name, cannot be accepted at this stage merely on the basis of affidavit Annexure P-9 of petitioner's mother. The petitioner has also not produced the date of birth as recorded in the school although admittedly the petitioner is studying in school. Consequently at this stage, it cannot be said that the petitioner is juvenile. Criminal Misc. No.M-34677 of 2011 (O&M) -3- Allegations against the petitioner and his co-accused are of very serious nature. Keeping in view the same, but without meaning to express any opinion on merits of the case or on the plea of the petitioner being juvenile, I do not find it to be a fit case to extend the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Dismissed. ( L. N. MITTAL) JUDGE 22nd November, 2011 'raj'