JUDGMENT H.S. Madaan, J. (Oral). - Case taken up through video conferencing. 2. This petition for pre-arrest bail has been filed by petitioner Karamvir, aged about 40 years, an accused in FIR No. 188 dated 30.09.2020, for offences under Sections 186, 332, 353 and 427 of IPC, registered with Police Station Nigdhu, District Karnal. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case as per prosecution version are that, on 30.09.2020, a team of officials from UHBVN, Taraori, Karnal which included Sh. Ishwar Singh (JE), Sh. Vikas (JE), Sh. Mohar Singh (AFM) and Sh. Mai Chand (LM) was sent for finding cases of theft of electricity; the said team found several such cases including one relating to the present petitioner Karamvir; one of the members of the team namely Sh. Vikas (JE) had started videography of the theft, then the present petitioner arrived at the spot in his car; he alighted from the car, abused Sh. Vikas (JE) and started beating him, snatched his mobile phone of value of Rs.20,000/- and damaged the same; he also threatened to kill the said JE; the matter was reported to the police; formal FIR in the matter was registered. The investigation in the case started. 4. Apprehending his arrest in this case, petitioner Karamvir had approached the Court of Sessions at Karnal, seeking pre-arrest bail. His such petition was assigned to Addl. Sessions Judge, Karnal, who vide order dated 08.10.2020, dismissed the same. Feeling aggrieved, he has knocked at the door of this Court, praying for grant of similar relief. Notice of motion. Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the State and opposes the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. I have heard learned counsel for the parties besides going through the record. 5. The petitioner is specifically named in the FIR and there are very grave and serious allegations of his assaulting a public servant on duty, snatching his mobile phone and damaging the same, besides giving threats of killing the said public servant. Such type of act and conduct of the petitioner cannot be taken in a light and casual manner, rather, is to be viewed with all the seriousness, otherwise, the public servants would not be able to perform their duties in a proper and fearless atmosphere. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is found to be necessary for complete and effective investigation. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is found to be necessary for complete and effective investigation. In case, the same is denied to the investigating agency that shall leave many gaps and loopholes, adversely affecting the investigation, which is uncalled for. Thus, finding no merit in the instant petition, the same stands dismissed.