CRM No.M-24262 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-21.9.2010 Kuldeep Kumar alias Kala and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr.Sarju Puri, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Shilesh Gupta, D.A.G. Punjab. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Having exercised their right of regular bail and lost in the Court of Session, petitioner Kuldeep Kumar alias Kala, Jatinder Kumar alias Tindu and Surjit Ram alias Shanga, have directed the present petition for regular bail in a case registered against them, vide FIR No.45 dated 15.5.2010, on accusation of having committed the offence punishable under section 395 IPC by the police of Police Station Sadar Shahid Bhagat Singh Nagar, invoking the provisions of section 439 Cr.PC. 2. Concisely, the prosecution case is that complainant Mohinder Pal alias Surinder Pal and PW Jeet Ram were dealing in sale and purchase of buffaloes. On the night intervening 12/13.5.2010, all the accused came to the fields of the complainant and caused injuries to him as well as PW Jeet Ram. The accused were stated to have snatched the mobile and Rs.32,000/- from them. On the basis of aforesaid allegations and in the wake of statement of the complainant, the present case was registered against the accused in the manner described here- in-above. 3. Notice of the petition was issued to the State. CRM No.M-24262 of 2010 2 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable help and after bestowal of thoughts over the entire matter, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be allowed in the obtaining circumstances of the case. 5. It is not a matter of dispute that the petitioners were arrested on 17.5.2010 and since then they are in judicial custody. Complainant Mohinder Pal alias Surinder Pal has sworn his affidavit (Annexure P1) and injured Jeet Ram PW sworn his affidavit (Annexure P2) stating therein that they have already compromised the matter with the petitioners. As charges have not yet been framed against them, therefore, the conclusion of the trial will naturally take long time. There is no history of previous involvement of the petitioners in any such case. 6. Therefore, taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above, to me, the present petitioners are entitled to regular bail in the present case. 7. In the light of the aforesaid reasons and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the case, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate or in his absence the Duty Magistrate, Shahid Bhagat Singh Nagar. 8. The instant petition is disposed of accordingly. 21.9.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge