Cr.Misc. M 18394 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.Misc. M 18394 of 2011 Date of decision: 2.9.2011 Jitender and another petitioner vs State of Haryana respondent Present:- Mr. MK Sood, Advocate Ms. Sushma Chopra, Addl.A.G.Hry Mr. JS Hooda, Advocate M.M.S.BEDI, J. The petitioners seek the concession of pre-arrest bail in a case registered at the instance of Ashok Kumar alleging that on 10.4.2011 the petitioners entered the shop of the complainant along with Dushyant and gave him fist blows. The complainant had received four injuries , as a result of which he was hospitalized. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that as a matter of fact a cross case has been registered against the complainant. A perusal of the cross version case, registered at the instance of Jintender petitioner No.1, indicates that the allegations have been levelled against the complainant that on 10.4.2011 petitioner No.1 Jatinder had gone to his village Amarpur at about 8.30 PM and when he was going back from his fields, Ashok Kumar called him to his medical store. Ashok Kumar was under the influence of liquor and started abusing him. Ashok Kumar with surgical scissors inflicted injury on the forehead of Dushyant. When second injury was being inflicted, petitioner No.1 had allegedly raised his right Cr.Misc. M 18394 of 2011 2 hand, as a result of which the scissors injured his right hand. Ashok Kumar had allegedly followed petitioner No.1 till Palwal and stopped the car of petitioner No.1. After dragging petitioner No.1, Amit, who was accompanying Ashok Kumar gave a sword blow on the right hand of petitioner No.1. Sudhir had inflicted a danda blow on the right hand of petitioner No.1. Nitin and Ashok Kumar had allegedly beaten petitioner No.1 and when Rakesh arrived on the spot, they escaped. Taking into consideration the fact that since it is a case of cross version, it will be debatable during trial as to which of the party was the aggressor party. Without expression of any opinion on merits of the case, the petition is allowed and it is ordered that in case of arrest of the petitioners, they will be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to the condition that they will join the investigation as and when required by the police and will not tamper with evidence or hamper the investigation. The petitioners will not commit the similar offence of which they are accused of during pendency of the trial. In case of any such eventuality, it will be open to the prosecution agency/ complainant to seek cancellation of bail. September 2 , 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE