IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 20840 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: August 16, 2010. Nathi Ram and others. ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Haryana ...... RESPONDENT(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. P.M.Anand, Addl.A.G., Haryana. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.255 dated 07.07.2010, under Sections 148/149/323/506/452/294 IPC, registered at Police Station Nissing, Karnal. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 22.07.2010 passed the following order:- “Crl.M.No.36805 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-20840 of 2010 Argues that parties are closely related and that dispute is between two real brothers over construction of Further argues that petitioners are in possession of first floor of adjouing house of the complainant. Further contends that in fact two persons from petitioners’ side received injuries, i.e., petitioner nos.1 and 2, vide MLR Annexures P2 and P3. Further contended that only simple injuries have been allegedly received by the complainant. Further argues that all the offences except offence punishable under Section 452 IPC are bailable one. Notice of motion for 16.8.2010. However, petitiones are directed to join the investigation and in case they are arrested, they shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that they have already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 22.07.2010. It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State that petitioners have joined the investigation and that they are no more required for any custodial interrogation. 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, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of petitioners – Nathi Ram, Shakuntla Devi, Ravinder and Seema, is accepted and order dated 22.07.2010 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioners is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 2 The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) August 16, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3