IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.(M) No.767 of 2009 Date of decision : 10.9.2009. Diwakar Dutt and another …Petitioners. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh . …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ? No. For the Petitioners : Mr. N.K.Thakur,Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. A.K.Bansal, Addl. A.G. with Mr. R.P.Singh, Assistant, Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral) This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioners on bail in FIR No. 313 dated 30.8.2009 registered at Police Station, Sadar Una, under Sections 367, 323, 506, 34 IPC. Status report has been filed. 2. Heard and perused the record. On behalf of the petitioners, it has been submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case at the instance of one Dinesh Kumar Rana, who is first cousin of petitioner No. 2 Manoj Rana. The complainant has concocted a false story. The petitioners are innocent. The petitioners are ready to join the ______________________ 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ? Yes. 2 investigation, no recovery is to be made from them. It has been submitted that the investigation in the case is almost complete. 3. The learned Additional Advocate General has opposed the bail application and has submitted that the case was registered at the instance of Dinesk Kumar on 30.8.2009. According to investigating agency on 29.8.2009 at about 3.45.p.m. the petitioner No.2 called the complainant on mobile phone on the pretext that he had some work with the complainant. On this the complainant went to the market and found that petitioners were sitting in the shop of a doctor. On the asking of petitioner No.2 complainant accompanied the petitioners in a car to Rakkar Colony. They told the complainant that they wanted to see the land of the complainant located in Ravi Colony. At that place Manoj asked the complainant why the complainant had asked his father not to talk to the father of the petitioner No.2. The complainant denied the allegation. On this, the petitioners started beatings him with kick and fist blows and complainant received injuries on his person. They threatened the complainant that they would kill him. The complainant was medically examined and the case was registered. 4. As per medical of the complainant, he has received 14 simple injuries on his person. The petitioners have joined the investigation, car bearing No. HP-20A-8235 has been recovered. In fact, Mr. Bansal, learned Additional Advocate General on instructions received has stated that no further recoveries are to be made. On the basis of status report, the learned Additional Advocate General has opposed the bail application. 5. The alleged incident is dated 29.8.2009 in the evening and the report was lodged on 30.8.2009 at 10.00 a.m. The recovery of car has been made. The petitioners have joined the investigation. No further recoveries 3 are to be made from the petitioners as submitted by the learned Additional Advocate General. 6. The petitioners have made out a case for grant of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Both the petitioners in the event of arrest, are ordered to be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/-each with one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer in FIR No.313 of 2009 dated 30.8.2009 under Sections 367, 323, 506, 34 IPC , Police Station Sadar, Una, H.P. subject to the conditions that the petitioners shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall not hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner. 7. The observations made in this order are for disposal of this application only and the same shall not be treated as expression of opinion on the merits of the case. Copy dasti. September 10, 2009. ( Kuldip Singh ) (GR) Judge.