Crl. Misc. No.M-28105 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: November 10, 2010. (1) Crl. Misc. No.M-28105 of 2010. Rajesh Vashistha and others . .. Petitioners * * * (2) Crl. Misc. No.M-28466 of 2010. Ravi Garg and another. .. Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana. .. Respondent * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI * * * PRESENT Mr.Sushil Jain, Advocate, for the petitioners in both the petitions. Ms.Gursreet Kaur, DAG., Haryana. . . . 1 Crl. Misc. No.M-28105 of 2010 M.M.S. BEDI, J (ORAL) This order will dispose of the above noted two petitions for the grant of pre-arrest bail i.e., one filed by Rajesh Vashishta, Sanjiv Garg and Narender Gulati bearing Crl.Misc. No.M- 28105 of 2010 and another filed by Ravi Garg and Mahesh Garg bearing Crl.Misc. No.M-28466 of 2010. The case was registered at the instance of Janak Raj alleging that the petitioners along with few others had attacked the complainant with sticks. So far as petitioners Rajesh Vashishta, Sanjiv Garg and Narender Gulati, are concerned ,no specific injury has been attributed to them. They were merely present at the time of the occurrence. So far as Mahesh Garg is concerned, he allegedly assaulted the complainant. It is only Ravi Garg, petitioner who had caused grievous injury on the person of Janak Raj. It will be debatable during trial whether all the petitioners being member of an unlawful assembly could be convicted for the grievous injury attributed to Ravi Garg and for the criminal intimidation. Except for Ravi Garg, all the petitioners can be granted the concession of pre- arrest bail. In view of the conduct of Ravi Kumar, his application for pre-arrest bail is dismissed. He may seek the concession of regular bail by surrendering before the Illaqua Magistrate, in accordance with law. So far as the petitioners Rajesh Vashishta, Sanjiv Garg, Narender Gulati and Mahesh Garg, are concerned, it is . . . 2 Crl. Misc. No.M-28105 of 2010 ordered that in case of their arrest they will be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to the conditions that they will join the investigation as and when required by the police and will not tamper the evidence or hamper the investigation, in any manner. They will also not commit the similar offence of which they are accused of. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, it will be open to the complainant or the Investigating Agency to seek the cancellation of bail. Disposed of. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE November 10, 2010. rka . . . 3