Crl.M.No.M 4055 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. 1. Crl.M.No.M 4055 of 2010 (O&M) Akhtar and others .....Petitioner v. State of Haryana ......Respondent 2. Crl.M.No.M. 5041 of 2010 (O&M) Mehboob alias Pappu and another ......Petitioners v. State of Haryana .....Respondent Date of Decision: March 18, 2010 CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Harkesh Manuja, Advocate for the petitoners. Mr.P.M.Anand, Addl.A.G. Haryana. Mr.S.S.Kharb, Advocate for the complainant. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) This order will dispose of both the aforementioned petitions bearing Crl.M.Nos.M 4055 and 5041 of 2010, filed by Akhtar, Jamil, Basa, Fayaj Hassan, Sanejar and Mehboob alias Pappu and Sharafat respectively, under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to them in case FIR No.326, dated 13.10.2009, under Sections 149, 323, 325, 307 IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar, Panipat. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone Crl.M.No.M 4055 of 2010 (O&M) -2- through the whole record carefully. This Court while issuing notice of motion in Crl. M. No.M 4055 of 2010, on 11.2.2010, passed the following order : “ Argues that petitioners are already released on bail for offence under Sections 323 and 325 IPC, however, offence under Section 307 IPC was added later on. Further argues that the main injury for offence under Section 307 IPC is not attributable to any of the present petitioners and the same is attributed to Iftkar, who is already in custody. Notice of motion for 18.3.2010. However, petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in case they are arrested, they shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. ” This Court while issuing notice of motion in Crl.M.No.M 5041 of 2010, on 22.2.2010, passed the following order: “Crl.M.No.8988 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Main case Argues that similarly placed co-accused have already been granted interim bail by this Court in Crl.M.No.M 4055 of 2010. It is further contended that the main accused to whom injury for offence under Section 307 IPC is attributed is already in custody. Notice of motion for 18.3.2010. However, petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in case they are arrested, they shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. To be heard alongwith Crl.M.No.M 4055 of 2010.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that pursuant to the said orders, the petitioners have already joined the Crl.M.No.M 4055 of 2010 (O&M) -3- investigation and that they are no more required for any investigation. It has been stated by learned State counsel as well that the petitioners have joined the investigation and that they are no more required for any custodial interrogation by the police. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. However, bail applications have been opposed by learned counsel for the complainant. In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, orders dated 11.2.2010 and 22.2.2010, granting interim bail to petitioners- Akhtar, Jamil, Basa, Fayaj Hassan, Sanejar and Mehboob alias Pappu and Sharafat are, hereby confirmed subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petitions stand disposed of accordingly. 18.3.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge