ARUN MAHAJAN AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners seek concession of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.184 dated 11.9.2016, registered under sections 307, 326, 379B, 324, 325, 341, 506, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Division E, Police Commissionerate, Amritsar.

(2.) Briefly, it may be noticed that FIR came to be registered on the complaint of one Dr.Krishan Thakur. Allegations are pertaining to an occurrence dated 12.8.2016 and in which the complainant was assaulted and inflicted grievous injuries by Ashwani Mahajan son of Roop Kumar Mahajan as also the present petitioners, namely, Arun Mahajan son of Roop Kumar Mahajan and Savi Mahajan son of Ashwani Mahajan. It was alleged that while the complainant was going along with his wife, he was encircled by the afore-mentioned three persons along with certain others. Lalkara was raised to teach the complainant a lesson for having filed a case against the Mahajans. Insofar as the present petitioners are concerned, the specific attribution is of Arun Mahajan having attacked with a 'Datar' (sharp edged weapon) which hit on the right side of the head of the complainant as also on his right hand. The role attributed to Savi Mahajan, petitioner No.2 is of infliction of kirpan blows on the left side of the head and also on the left hand.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would argue that the version set up by the complainant is highly improbable. The alleged incident is stated to have occurred on 12.8.2016 in broad day-light, but there is no independent witness to support the complainant's version except one Jitender Sareen. It is argued that if such an assault had actually taken place and that also in a public thorough-fare, then passers-by and locals would have certainly intervened. Veracity of the complainant's version is questioned even on the count that the complainant got himself admitted on 12.8.2016 at Government Medical College, Amritsar and left the Hospital without getting the MLR and proceeded to take admission in a private Hospital, namely, Amandeep Hospital, Amritsar. The complainant thereafter is stated to have come back to the Government Hospital on 20.8.2016 with an application for MLR. Learned counsel contends that no explanation is coming forth for delaying the MLR over a period of eight days. It is also argued that even if the petitioner was unfit to give a statement on the date of the occurrence i.e. 12.8.2016, he was stated to be accompanied by his wife and who, in turn, could have got the FIR lodged on his behalf. It is argued that an overview of the facts and circumstances are a pointer towards false implication and the motive is that there was already a pending dispute between the complainant and the accused party over use of a common passage.