Crl.Misc.No.M-16701 of 2011 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: July 20, 2011. (1) Crl.Misc.No.M-16701 of 2011 (O&M)). Mona @ Ranjan Verma .. Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab .. Respondent * * * (2) Crl.Misc.No.M-19356 of 2011 (O&M). Gagandep Singh @ Gaggna .. Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab .. Respondent * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI * * * PRESENT Mr.Vivek Singla, Advocate, for the petitioners in both the petitions. Mr.Arshvinder Singh, Addl. AG., Punjab. . . . 1 Crl.Misc.No.M-16701 of 2011 (O&M) M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) This order will dispose of the above noted two petitions for the grant of pre-arrest bail one filed by Mona alias Ranjan Verma and another by Gagandeep Singh alias Gaggna. As per the allegations in the FIR, when Vikas Kumar, complainant along with his friend Saudagar Singh and Satta, was coming from a party were intercepted by occupants of Verna Car and a Scorpio Car reached immediately thereafter. The petitioners along with Gurpreet Singh, Baljinder Singh, Seema Senior and Seema Junior along with 7-8 persons started giving beatings to the complainant. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner Mona has not been attributed any grievous injury but it has been wrongly recorded by the lower Court that he had caused injuries to the complainant with Kirpan. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that offence under Section 308 IPC was added on the basis of the report of the Doctor after a period of one year. I have heard the counsel for the parties. It is an admitted fact that as per the report of doctor of PGI, the injuries on the person of Saudagar Singh were declared dangerous to life as both the petitioners were members of an unlawful assembly responsible for the grievous injury suffered by Saudagar Singh. No extra ordinary exceptional circumstances exist to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. No doubt . . . 2 Crl.Misc.No.M-16701 of 2011 (O&M) generally addition of a serious offence after accused having been released on bail constitutes a ground for grant of pre-arrest bail but the circumstances of the present case indicate that the complainant was intercepted by two cars by 7-8 persons who had not only intercepted the Car but had inflicted injuries being armed with deadly weapons. Peculiar circumstances of the case do not warrant the concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. Both the petitions are dismissed. In case the petitioners surrenders in the added offence under Section 308 IPC, they would be entitled to file an application for the grant of regular bail which will be decided expeditiously. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE July 20, 2010. rka . . . 3