IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1. Crl. Misc. No. M- 21970 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: September 9, 2010. Balwinder Singh @Billa ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Punjab ...... RESPONDENT(s) 2. Crl.Misc. No.M-22792 of 2010(O&M) Rupinder Singh ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Punjab ...... RESPONDENT(s) Present: Mr. Pardeep Bajaj, Advocate and Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Bhavna, D.A.G., Punjab. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) Both the aforementioned petitions have been filed for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in FIR No.129 dated 02.06.2009, under Sections 452/307/436/511/342/427/294/120-B/148/149 IPC and 25/54/59 Arms Act, registered at Police Station Jagraon, District Ludhiana. CRM No.M-21970 of 2010 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that only simply injury to the nephew of complainant-Darshan Singh, has been attributed to the petitioners-accused and no injury to the complainant has been attributed to them. Further contended that petitioner-accused, Rupinder Singh has been continuing in custody since 14.09.2009 and petitioner- accused, Balwinder Singh @Billa has been continuing in custody since 27.02.2010. It is further contended that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future as no witness has been examined so far. It has also been contended that one person on the side of petitioners had also received injuries and he succumbed to the injuries at the spot at the hands of complainant party. It is further contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that on the similar allegations co-accused Devinder Singh has already been granted bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. No.M-6798 of 2010 vide order dated 13.05.2010. All these facts have not been disputed by learned counsel for the State. However, it has been stated that it came during investigation that petitioners’ party was aggressor and that injuries caused to a person on the side of petitioners were in the exercise of right of self defence by the complainant party. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. Hence, keeping in view these facts and without expressing any opinion on merits, the instant applications for regular bail filed on behalf of Balwinder singh @Billa and Rupinder Singh, are allowed. 2 CRM No.M-21970 of 2010 Bail to the satisfaction of CJM/Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) September 9, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3