IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1. Crl. Misc. No. M- 26214 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: October 4, 2010. Lalit Jain @Lali ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Punjab. ...... RESPONDENT(s) 2. Crl. Misc. No. M- 21713 of 2010(O&M) Rakesh Jain @Sethi ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Punjab. ...... RESPONDENT(s) Present: Mr. Sanjiv Pandey, Advocate and Mr. N.S.Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Bhavna, D.A.G., Punjab. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) CRM No.M-26214 of 2010 Both the aforementioned petitions have been filed for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in FIR No.50 dated 19/03/2010, under Sections 307/148/149 IPC, registered at Police Station Raikot, Police District Ludhiana Rural, District Ludhiana. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner – Lalit Jain that he has been continuing in custody since 01.04.2010. It is further contended that it is a case of version and cross-version and that petitioner –Lalit Jain also received injuries and that vide details of injuries Annexure P2, medico legal report, he also received two incised wounds near the right shoulder joint on the scapular region besides other injuries. Further contends that complainant-injured was discharged from the hospital on 22.03.2010 and that no fracture of bone of the head was found. Further contends that case is not likely to be decided in near future as even charge has not been framed so far. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner- Rakesh Jain that injury attributed to him does not find mentioned in the MLR of the injured. Further contends that the present dispute is between two friends and that it is a case of version and cross-version and the same has taken place at the shop of petitioners. Learned counsel for the State has not disputed these facts. 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. 2 CRM No.M-26214 of 2010 Hence, keeping in view these facts and without expressing any opinion on merits, the instant applications for regular bail filed on behalf of Lalit Jain @Lali and Rakesh Jain @Sethi are allowed. Bail to the satisfaction of CJM/Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) October 4, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3