CRM-M No. 10008 of 2011 **** Vikas and others vs. State of Haryana Present: Mr. S.K.,Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Shalini Attri, DAG, Haryana. Mr.J.V.Yadav, Advocate for the complainant. **** This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed in case bearing FIR No. 216 dated 18.10.2010, under Sections 323, 325, 506/34 IPC(Section 307 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Sadar Narnaul, District Mohindergarh. On 01.04.2011 the following contention was noticed:- “Learned counsel for the petitioners states that firstly this FIR was registered under Section 323 and thereafter Section 325 was added, pursuant to which all the petitioners were arrested and then bailed out. He further states that now after five months Section 307 has been added.” These factual assertions have been accepted by learned DAG on instructions from ASI Janak Raj. However, learned counsel for the complainant has argued that originally the offence was illegally diluted by the police and that is why now Section 307 IPC has been rightly invoked and, therefore, the petitioners should not be given the benefit thereof. In my opinion this argument cannot be pressed into service at this stage since, in fact the event as chronologically described above, have taken place. In case the petitioners are found guilty they would be awarded the punishment commensurate with the offence. In the circumstances I deem it appropriate to grant the CRM-M No. 10008 of 2011 -2- concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. In case they are arrested, they shall be released on bail by the investigating officer to his satisfaction subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Petition stands disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) JUDGE May 13, 2011 sunita