Crl.M.No.M-14021 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-14021 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: June 29, 2010 Rajiv Kumar .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.A.S.Kalra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs.Bhavna Gupta, DAG, Punjab. Mr.A.K.Khunger, Advocate and Mr.Parvesh Sachdeva, Advocate for the complainant. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR No.9, dated 10.4.2010, registered under Sections 326, 324, 323, 341, 34 IPC, at Police Station Bahavwala, District Ferozepur. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 13.5.2010, passed the following order: “Crl.M.No.25133 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-14021 of 2010 Argues that only injury for which offence under Section 326 has been added is on little finger with gandasa. Notice of motion for 29.6.2010. However, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he shall be released on interim bail Crl.M.No.M-14021 of 2010 (O&M) -2- by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Mr.A.K.Khunger, Advocate, who is present in Court, puts in appearance on behalf of the complainant.” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the said order, the petitioner has already joined the investigation. It has been stated by learned State counsel as well that the petitioner has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation by the police. However, bail application has been opposed by learned counsel for the complainant. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, order dated 13.5.2010, granting interim bail to petitioner-Rajiv Kumar, is, hereby confirmed subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. 29.6.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge