1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No.742 of 2008. Date of decision: 25.7.2008. Sushil Kumar & Ors. ………. Petitioners Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr. H.C. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Ansul Bansal, Additional Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge. (Oral) The petitioners have filed the present application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for releasing them on bail in FIR No. 43 registered on 13.7.2008 at Police Station, Chopal under Sections 147,148,149,323,324,336,452,506 IPC and Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act. The respondent has filed status report. 2. The brief facts of the case are that Sarla Devi complainant reported the matter at Police Station, Chopal that she has three sons namely Kedar, Inder Singh and Mohinder Singh. On 12.7.2008 she, her husband, sons and guests were sleeping. At about 11.30 pm she heard knock at the door, she got up from the bed and noticed that some body pushed the door from out side with kick and the door got opened. Satish Kumar, Sushil, Layak Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes 2 Ram, Sher Singh, Yashpal alias Yashu, Surender alias Bablu and Rajeev, all of a sudden entered into the room and asked her about her sons. They threatened that they would kill her sons. Satish Kumar without any cause slapped her and they started misbehaving, her son Mohinder Singh came to the spot. The aforesaid persons gave beatings to Mohinder Singh. Satish Kumar was armed with Dangru, Sushil and Yashpal were armed with dandas. The aforesaid persons gave beatings to her son Mohinder Singh with dandas and kick blows and with some sharp edged weapon. They also gave beatings to her with fist blows and slaps. She and her son Mohinder Singh raised alarm, on this her other sons Inder Singh, Kedar and her husband Deep Ram, guests Papu and Indira Devi came to the spot, they intervened and saved them. The aforesaid persons ran away from the spot but while leaving the place, threatened openly that at the appropriate time they would kill them. The said persons were under the influence of liquor. Later on her sons Inder Singh and Mohinder Singh told her that the aforesaid boys met them at Sarri fare and they were under the influence of liquor and at that time also they threatened that they would see them. She sustained injuries on her right hand, her son Mohinder Singh sustained injuries on different parts of the body. On this, the case was registered. 3. During investigation Sarla Devi and Mohinder Singh were got medically examined, Surender Singh alias Bablu handed over empty cartridge on 14.7.2008 which was fired with double barrel gun out side the house of the complainant and other 3 recoveries were also made. The petitioners have joined the investigation. The gun has also been taken into possession. It has been submitted that investigation in the case is almost complete. The report with respect to use of the gun from the Expert is awaited. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. The complainant party quarreled with Sushil Kumar in the local fare and threatened him that they would make him 100% disabled. Sushil Kumar has undergone operation and has 40% disability. The petitioners are permanent residents of village Seri. They have joined the investigation and shall continue to join the investigation as per directions of this Court, no recovery is to be made from them. The custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. The petitioners are ready to furnish bonds as per directions of this Court, if released on bail. The learned Addl. Advocate General has opposed the bail application. 5. I have considered the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. It has been submitted on behalf of the respondent that investigation in the case is almost complete. The petitioners have joined the investigation, in these circumstances the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary. They are ready to furnish bail bonds. In these circumstances the petitioners have made out a case for releasing them on bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, application is allowed. The petitioners are ordered to 4 be released on bail in the event of arrest subject to furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each with one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of arresting officer with the conditions that the petitioners shall continue to 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. 6. The observations made in the order shall not be construed as expression of opinion on the merit of the case. Copy Dasti on usual terms ( Kuldip Singh ) Judge July 25, 2007 (sks)