Rajbir Singh Alias Rajveer Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-1311-2023 Decided on : 11.01.2023 Rajbir Singh @ Rajveer Singh ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present :

Mr. Pritpal Singh Miglani, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.(Oral) Instant petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.PC for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.255 dated 03.12.2022 under Sections 324, 326, 452 and 506 IPC registered at Police Station Focal Point, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the delay in lodging of the FIR from the date of the alleged occurrence i.e. 27.11.2022 goes a long way to show that a false and fabricated version has been brought forth against the petitioner. While inviting the attention of this Court to the FIR in question, learned counsel submits that the petitioner was attributed a sword blow on the hands and arms of the complainant, however, there was no MLR to that effect from which it could be discerned that any injury was inflicted with sword upon the complainant much less inviting the mischief of Section 326 IPC or even Section 324 IPC. Notice of motion.

On the asking of Court, Mr. Amit Rana, Sr. DAG, Punjab accepts notice.

SONIA BURA 2023.01.12 14:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-1311-2023 -2Learned State counsel on instructions has however, strongly controverted and disputed the submissions made by counsel opposite. Learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Narender Kumar submits that the petitioner was armed with sword and inflicted injuries on the left hand and arm of the complainant as a result of which his left arm was severed while the other hand was fractured. It has also been submitted that the delay in the lodging of the FIR was on account of the fact that the complainant, who was hospitalized soon after the occurrence in question, was unfit and remained hospitalized till 30.11.2022. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Prima facie there are serious allegations levelled against the petitioner, for which he does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE 11.01.2023 sonia Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No SONIA BURA 2023.01.12 14:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document