MAKHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that though the petitioner have been enlarged on bail for an offence under Section 226 of the Indian Indian Penal Code, there is every likelihood that the Investigating Officer would introduce an offence under Section 307 I.P.C. against the petitioners and would arrest them for that ofence without affording any opportunity. This contention is not well founded. The mere adding of additional offence in the pending case cannot be ipso facto a ground for the petitioners to be enlarged on bail in the anticidated offence. Learned -counsel for the petitioners relies upon Dr. A.G. Bhagwat v. U.T. Chandigarh RCR 1988(1) 591. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that the Investigating Officer if wishes to arrest the petitioners on the addition of an offence under Section 307 I.P.C. shall not arrest them in this F.I.R. without leave of the Court which granted bail and that Court obviously shall hear the petitioners if such orders are passed.

(3.) WITH these observations, the petition is disposed of. Ordered accordingly.