IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-29932 of 2011 Date of decision : October 13, 2011 Dharam Chand and another ....Petitioners versus State of Haryana and another ....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. N.S. Shekhawat, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. JP Sharma, Advocate for respondent no. 2-complainant L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Dharam Chand and Phool Singh have filed this petition for anticipatory bail in Criminal Complaint No. RT/61 of 2006/2009, titled as Subhash versus Dharam Chand and others, under sections 323, 324, 326, 302, 506, 148, 149 IPC, Annexure P/1 instituted by respondent no. 2 – complainant Subhash Chand against petitioners and other accused. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that cause of death in this case was not the alleged injuries caused by the petitioners. In this regard reference has been made to opinion Annexure P/8 given by Medical Officer regarding cause of death after seeing histopathological report. It has been opined that cause of death was septicemia as a result of perforation peritonitis. It was pointed out that according to MLR Annexure P/4 of the deceased there were only two injuries i.e. lacerated wound on left side of mandible and lacerated wound over mid forehead and in report Annexure P/9, it has been reported by the Medical officer that there was no Criminal Misc. No. M-29932 of 2011 -2- other injury on the person of the deceased. It was, thus, pointed out that aforesaid lacerated wound on left side of mandible and on mid forehead could not be the cause of septicemia as a result of perforation peritonitis. It was, thus, contended that death of the deceased cannot be attributed to the injuries allegedly caused by the petitioners and other co-accused. Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 – complainant has no objection to the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. It is also stated by the counsel for the parties that parties have effected compromise and respondent no. 2 – complainant had even made application for withdrawal of the complaint which was however declined by the Illaqa Magistrate. In view of the aforesaid without meaning to express any opinion on merits, the instant anticipatory bail petition is allowed. The petitioners on appearance before Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Mohindergarh on or before 29.10.2011, the date said to be fixed there shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate. ( L.N. Mittal ) October 13, 2011 Judge 'dalbir'