The court may grant anticipatory bail based on the variance in witness statements and the nature of the allegations against the accused.

T.H.B. Chalapathi, J. - It is quite unfortunate that a young boy of 13 years old was is the son of one Madan Lal died on the intervening night of 26/27-2-95. The father of the deceased boy gave a statement to the police on 27-2-95 on the basis of which FIR No. 60 dated 27-2-95 was registered at PS Sadar Dabwali under section 304-A Indian Penal Code. In the said statement Madan Lal said that his son received the gun shot injury on his left shoulder accidentally when this son was watching the singer singing. The police conducted the investigation and filed a final report as required under section 173 Criminal Procedure Code In the said report it has been stated that the case was investigated by ASI Mohinder Singh who tried to trace out the culprits but all went in vain. It is also further stated therein that the complainant has been informed regarding the closure of the investigation. The learned Magistrate by his order dated 29-2-96 accepted the final report and cancelled the FIR. After more that 4 and half years from the date of incident the father of the deceased Madan Lal approached the Magistrate Dabwali and got his statement recorded under section 164 Criminal Procedure Code on 4-11-99. In the said statement recorded under section 164 Criminal Procedure Code Madan Lal has given a completely contrary and varying statement to the earlier version given by him to the police on 27-2-95. In the statement recorded on 4-11-99 Madan Lal has stated that Om Parkash Hitler directed his son to serve the guests and the deceased refused to do so. Then Om Prakash Hitler slapped him and on hearing the noise Madan Lal went there and asked Om Prakash Hitler to pardon his son as he is a child, but the sons of Om Prakash Hitler namely Sanjay, Sandeep and Manoj wanted their father to shoot the son of Madan Lal as he insulted him. Then Om Prakash Hitler armed with gun fired shot at his son Jit Ram due to which he died on the way to hospital. On the basis of the statement of Madan Lal recorded on 4-11-99 further investigation in FIR No. 60 dated 27-2-95 was taken up by the police. Apprehending the arrest the petitioners who are the son and driver of Om Prakash Hitler filed this petition for anticipatory bail. I am of the opinion that in view of the variance in the statements given by Madan Lal in the year 1995 immediately after the accident and in the statement recorded by the Magistrate under section 164 Criminal Procedure Code on 4-11-99 and also in view of the fact that the allegations in the statement recorded under section 164 Criminal Procedure Code on 4-11-99 the petitioners only exhorted their father to shoot at Jit Ram that this is a fit case for granting bail to the petitioners.

2. I accordingly direct the release of the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest on their executing a bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer and also on further condition that they shall make themselves available as and when required and shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not give any threat, promise or inducement to any of the witnesses. They are further directed not to leave Chautala without prior permission of the Magistrate at Dabwali and that they shall surrender their passports forthwith to the JMIC if they have any.

3. The learned AG appearing for the State stated that two eye witnesses have already been examined. In view of the fact that the accident took place more than 4 and half years back I direct the investigating agency to complete the investigation as expeditiously as possible preferably within 4 months from the date of receipt of this order and take such steps as are required under section 173 Criminal Procedure Code

Petition allowed. C