Bahadur Singh vs State of Haryana

S.S. Saron, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

The Petitioner Bahadur Singh seeks regular bail pending trial for the offences under Sections 302 etc. of the IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act.

The FIR in the case has been recorded on the statement of Raj Kumar. In the occurrence that took place on 18.9.2006, the Petitioner Bahadur Singh is alleged to have been armed with `Danda''. It is alleged by the complainant Raj Kumar that when his brother Karamvir tried to rescue the complainant then Suraj Bhan, Bahadur Singh (Petitioner) and Vijay caused injuries to him. The place where the injuries were caused is not mentioned. In any case, the statement (Annexure-P.1) of Karamvir has been recorded u/s 161 Code of Criminal Procedure in which, it is inter alia stated that Vijay (non-Petitioner) gave a `Danda'' blow on the head of his father Amar Singh and Kamlesh wife of Zile Singh gave a brick blow which she was holding in her hand directly on the chest of his father. Bahadur Singh (Petitioner) gave a `Danda'' blow which he was holding on the foot of Amar Singh. To similar effect are the statements (Annexures - P.2 and P.3) of Suresh Kumar and Ram Avtar, who have stated that the Petitioner gave a `Danda'' blow on the foot of their father. In the post- mortem report of Amar Singh (deceased), the injury has been mentioned to be on the lateral aspect of thigh. It may be noticed that Kamlesh wife of Zile Singh has been granted the concession of bail vide order dated 21.8.2007.

Learned Counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the application for bail and submitted that despite Kamlesh, who was granted the concession of bail vide order dated 21.8.2007, the learned Additional Sessions (Fast Track Court), Gurgaon has considered the matter and observed that Kamlesh was a lady and injury attributed to her was not reflected in the MLR or the post-mortem report. It was observed that injury attributed to the Petitioner Bahadur Singh is reflected in the post-mortem report.

The effect of the injury and the seat of the same is to be considered and gone into by the learned trial Court after evidence is concluded. It is not in dispute that the injury which has been mentioned to be on the foot is on the thigh of the deceased Amar Singh, the same is on a non-vital part and is simple in nature. The main injury has been attributed to Vijay (non- Petitioner) on the head of Amar Singh. At this stage, it cannot be said that the offence u/s 149 IPC is made out or not.

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Petitioner on his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon shall be admitted to bail.

The criminal miscellaneous petition stands disposed of.