- (1.) Petitioner Tirlk Raj son of Shrichand has directed the instant petition for the grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered against him along with his other co-accused, by means of FIR No.321 dated 27.12.2010 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 148, 302 and 323 read with section 149 IPC, by the police of Police Station Kunjpura, District Karnal, invoking the provisions of Section 438 Cr.P.C.
(2.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, going through the record with his valuable help and after deep consideration over the entire matter, to my mind, there is no merit in the present petition in this respect.
(3.) As is evident from the record, that there are direct allegations that at the first instance, the petitioner and his other co-accused illegally started raising construction on the plot of complainant party and then they attacked, caused injuries with danda, kulhari and gandasi, culminating into the death of Shrichand. The name of petitioner finds mentioned in the statement of complainant Ram Kumar, which formed the basis of FIR (Annexure P1). No doubt, he managed to be exonerated by the police, but taking into consideration the substantive evidence on record, the petitioner was summoned by the trial Court under section 319 Cr.PC, vide order dated 4.4.2012 (Annexure P6), which, in substance, is as under:- "As held above there is sufficient evidence on record which shows that accused Tilak Raj was also resent and participate in this occurrence and at this stage it is sufficient to say that this accused is also involved in this occurrence and he was found innocent on flimsy grounds. Above all the other defence of this accused that he was present at some other place or was on his duty away from the spot as set out by the counsel for the accused chalaned is also not to be seen at this stage though no such defence theory has been made basis for declaring him innocent nor any evidence in this regard has been collected which would have been easily done and can be good ground for not arresting and challaning him. Resultantly, it is a fit case where the prayer of the complainant and learned Public Prosecutor through this application that accused Tilak Raj was very much present during this occurrence and participated in this occurrence as per common object of unlawful assembly and thus are also involved in this crime is well founded and the process adopted by the police by not arresting him is without any base. As such in view of un-rebutted stand of the complainant which is otherwise not disputed by the investigating officer, it comes out that there is sufficient prima facie evidence on the record at this stage. Which justifies summoning of accused Tilak Raj and to put him on trial along with other accused persons for the same offences for which they have already been charge sheeted, especially when the police has failed to justify its theory of innocence without any evidence or reasons. As a sequel to my above discussion, the application in hand is allowed and it is ordered that let accused Tilak Raj be summoned accordingly through warrants of arrest for 28.04.2012 for commission of offences punishable under sections 302, 323, 324 read with section 149 IPC. Papers be tagged with main file. Needless to say, anything stated in this order shall not be misconstrued as a opinion on the merits of the case." ;