In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. CRM.M 14697 of 2009 (O&M) Decided on July 28,2009. Arvind Kumar and another -- Petitioners vs. State of Punjab --Respondent. Present: Ms.Puja Chopra, Advocate,for the petitioners Mr.Ranbir Singh Rawat,A.A.G.Punjab. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J: (Oral) The petitioners have applied for anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest in a case registered vide FIR No.50 dated 21.4.2009 under Sections 324/323/34 IPC at Police Station, Khui Khera and Section 326 IPC, which was later on added. On the statement of Pardeep Kumar son of Indraj, the aforesaid FIR was registered in which it was alleged that on 20.4.2009, he alongwith his father and Subhash Chander were present in their house. At about, 9.30.p.m, Indraj son of Mukha Ram armed with Kappa, Arvind son of Indraj and Bimla Devi wife of Indraj armed with Dang came there and raised a lalkara that today Indraj and others be taught a lesson for jointly fixing the time and turn of water. Indraj son of Mukha Ram (petitioner) gave a blow from his Kappa from its right side which hit on the left side of jaw of his father. Arvind gave blow of Gandasi which hit on right CRM.M 14697 of 2009 (O&M) -2- shoulder of his father whereas Bimla Devi gave a Dang blow which hit his father on his left shoulder, who fell down smeared with blood. When he tried to save his father, then Arvind gave a Gandasi blow which hit him on left shoulder. On raising an alarm, the assailants ran away from the spot alongwith their respective weapons. Before coming to this Court, the petitioners had applied for anticipatory bail before the Court below, which was dismissed on 18.5.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case whereas it is submitted by the learned counsel for the State that the injuries attributed to the petitioners have resulted into fracture of mandible which is an injury grievous in nature. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the petitioners are attributed grievous injury of fracture of jaw (mandible), I do not find it to be a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby dismissed. However, this observation of mine shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case before the trial Court. July 28,2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge