Criminal Misc. -M No. 26627 of 2011 (1) IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 28.11.2011 1. Criminal Misc. -M No. 26627 of 2011 (O&M) Sukhjinder Singh @ Bau .. Petitioner versus State of Punjab .. Respondent 2. Criminal Misc. -M No. 28142 of 2011 (O&M) Sawinder Singh and another .. Petitioners versus State of Punjab .. Respondent 3. Criminal Misc. -M No. 28750 of 2011 (O&M) Sahib Singh .. Petitioner versus State of Punjab .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. B. S. Walia, Advocate, for the petitioners in CRM -M Nos. 26627 and 28750 of 2011. Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners in CRM -M No. 28142 of 2011. Mr. K. S. Pannu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal, J. This order will dispose of the aforesaid petitions as the same arise out of a common dispute. Prayer is for grant of bail pending trial. The petitioners in CRM -M Nos. 26627 and 28750 of 2011 are accused in FIR No. 32 dated 10.7.2010, registered under Sections 326, 324, 323, 34 IPC at Police Station Bhindi Saidan, Tehsil Ajnala, District Amritsar, whereas the petitioners in Criminal Misc. -M No. 26627 of 2011 (2) CRM -M No. 28142 of 2011 are the accused in the cross-version in the aforesaid FIR registered for the same occurrence. The alleged cause of fight was common boundary of their agricultural land. The injuries attributed to the petitioners in CRM -M No. 28142 of 2011 are on palm and middle finger which were opined to be grievous, whereas injuries to petitioner in CRM -M No. 26627 of 2011 is on the right leg, which was opined to be grievous. The injury attributed to the petitioner in CRM -M No. 28750 of 2011 was opined to be simple. Learned counsels for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are neighbourers as they have common boundaries of their agricultural land. On account of misunderstanding, the alleged occurrence took place. Both the parties have suffered injuries. It was at the spur of moment with no previous enmity. They are in custody since 16.6.2011. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that considering the kind of injuries caused to each other by the parties, they do not deserve bail at this stage as trial is yet to commence. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the petitioners are neighbourers; the fight was on account of dispute regarding the boundaries of their agricultural land; the petitioners are in custody since 16.6.2011 and the prosecution evidence is yet to start, in my opinion, the petitioners deserve concession of bail pending trial. The petitioners are directed to be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate, Amritsar. The petitions stand disposed of. 28.11.2011 ( Rajesh Bindal ) vs Judge