VIKRAM BHARDWAJ Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of three petitions bearing CRM M- 22019 of 2014, CRM-M-27639 of 2014 and CRM-M-27831 of 2014. The FIR was registered at the instance of complainant Amritpal Singh Sandhu, Advocate of Pehowa Bar Association. As per the allegations in FIR, the complainant is the nephew of Gehal Singh Sandhu who remained President of the Bar Association for four times during the period from 2010 to 2013. During said period, the construction work of lawyers' Chambers in Pehowa Court had been completed. The construction was approved by the High Court. As per the allegations in FIR, Ravinder Kumar and petitioners had put their sheds on the site which were requested to be removed. Contractor Baldev Singh had started the construction of the Chambers on the site approved due to which their sheds were removed on account of which Ravinder Kumar, non-petitioner abused Gehal Singh Sandhu, Advocate and contractor Baldev Singh and threatened to take the revenge. Ravinder Kumar had become Secretary of the Bar Association and petitioner Vikram Bhardwaj had been elected as President. In order to harass the complainant party, he stared giving notices on false pretext. After Mr. Gehal Singh Sandhu, Mr.N.K. Goswami was elected as President for the year 2013-14. He had constituted a Committee which inspected the accounts. Ravinder Kumar and others had called Bar meeting on May 29, 2014 while Sh.Gehal Singh Sandhu had gone to Dehradun to conduct a case. The above said Advocates used the objectionable words against the former President regarding which certain Advocates raised objections. On May 30, 2014 at about 10.00 a.m./ 10.15 a.m. complainant and his uncle Gehal Singh Sandhu and cousin Jodhvir Singh Sandhu, a student of law final year, were attacked by Ravinder Kumar and above said petitioners. So far as Ravinder Kumar is concerned, he is alleged to have given sua injury on the chest and shoulder of complainant Amritpal Singh Sandhu. The petitioner Vikram Bhardwaj is alleged to have taken sua from his co-accused Ravinder Kumar and inflicted injury on the person of Gehal Singh Sandhu on the chest. So far as petitioner Sumit Garg is concerned, he has been attributed lalkara, fist and slap blows on the person of Jodhvir Singh Sandhu. Petitioner Ashok Bhardwaj is attributed fist and kick blows on the person of Gehal Singh Sandhu.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioners have vehemently urged that none of the petitioners have been attributed any grievous injury on any vital part of complainant or the injured. It is claimed that on account of dispute regarding accounts of the Bar Association, Pehowa, the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. Counsel for the petitioners claim that as the petitioners have joined investigation, the circumstances do not warrant custodial interrogation or arrest of the petitioners especially when the main allegations are against Ravinder Kumar who has not yet been arrested.

(3.) On the other hand, State counsel and Mr.H.S. Gill, Sr. counsel for the complainant have put in appearance to oppose the petitions for prearrest bail contending that all the petitioners had with common intention and pre-determined mind, assaulted the complainant, Gehal Singh Sandhu and his son. Counsel for the complainant has vehemently urged that in view of the specific overt acts having been attributed to the petitioners, there are no extraordinary exceptional circumstances to grant the concession of prearrest bail to the petitioners.