Criminal Misc. No.M-2544 of 2009 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No.M-2544 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 29.1.2009 Sushila and others ......Petitioners Versus Union Terrory of Chandigarh .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. H.S.Bhullar, Advocate, for the petitioners. **** SABINA, J. This petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.522 dated 12.12.2008 under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Mani Majra, U.T.Chandigarh. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 12.12.2008 at about 8.00 a.m., the complainant got ready and was proceeding to Panchkula Courts. When he (complainant) reached near Government School, Mauli Complex for a hair cut, 3-4 boys told him that he had been called at the house of Surinder Thekedar. The Criminal Misc. No.M-2544 of 2009 (O&M) 2 complainant accompanied those boys (including Shahanshah and Batishta) to the house of Surinder Thekedar. There Surinder Thekedar gave a gandasi blow on his head. The complainant fell on the ground. Surinder Thekedar and his other companions i.e. his son Chiku and his second son, whose name he could not know but he could identify him if produced before him, Batishta and Shahanshah started giving danda blows on his person. When complainant tried to run away, wife of Surinder Thekedar gave a tooth bite on his right arm. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely involved in this case. As per the prosecution case no specific injury was attributed to petitioner No.3- Kuldeep and only a tooth bite was attributed to petitioner No.1- Sushila. A perusal of the FIR reveals that Surinder, his wife and sons along with two others had inflicted injuries on the person of the complainant. Therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioners might be necessary at this stage. Keeping in view the seriousness of the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioners, this petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE January 29, 2009 anita