CRM-M-32720-2011 (O&M) [ 1 ] :::::::::: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-32720-2011 (O&M) Date of decision:01.11.2011 Suraj ...Petitioner Versus State of U.T., Chandigarh ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. This is a petition for grant of pre-arrest bail in a case registered vide FIR No.335 dated 12.10.2011, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 435, 506 IPC, Police Station Sector-31, U.T., Chandigarh. The FIR is registered on the complaint of ASI Gurwinder Singh in which he has alleged that on the intervening night of 11/12.10.2011, while on patrol duty in the area of Ram Darbar Phase-I & II, he received a wireless message that a quarrel had taken place near House No.1042, Phase-I, Ram Darbar, Chandigarh. After reaching at the road in between Phase-I market and the School, he saw that 5-6 youths had set a motorcycle at fire and on seeing the police party, had fled away from the spot. The fire brigade was called and in the meantime, the complainant came to know that two parties are pelting stones on each other near House No.1042, Phase-I, Ram Darbar, Chandigarh. When he reached there, he saw that some persons were having swords and sticks in their hands and were rioting and pelting stones on each other. The present petitioner was also a member of the unlawful assembly who not only continued fighting with swords despite the presence of the police but had also pelted stones on the policy party. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner CRM-M-32720-2011 (O&M) [ 2 ] :::::::::: has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no specific role attributed to him and he is a young man. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the record. There are specific allegations against the petitioner that he was armed with a sword and had inflicted injuries. Not only that, he also pelted stones on the police party. One motorcycle was also set at fire at the spot. Since the petitioner had actively participated in the rioting and causing injuries to the police party, therefore, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the present petition is hereby dismissed. November 01, 2011 (Rakesh Kumar Jain ) vinod* Judge