Crl.M.No.M-5657 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. 1. Crl.M.No.M-5657 of 2010 (O&M) Sat Pal and another .....Petitioners v. State of Haryana ......Respondent 2. Crl.M.No.M-9261 of 2010 (O&M) Roshan Lal .....Petitioner v. State of Haryana .....Respondent Date of Decision: May 18, 2010 CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Randeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.P.M.Anand, Addl. A.G, Haryana. Mr.K.S.Sidhu, Advocate for Mr.A.S.Virk, Advocate for the complainant. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) This order will dispose of both the aforementioned petitions bearing Crl.M.Nos.M-5657 and 9261 of 2010, filed by Sat Pal, Mastan and Roshan Lal respectively, under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to them in case FIR No.168, dated 7.5.2007, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 326, 148, 149, 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshtra. (Sections 325 and 326 IPC added subsequently). I have heard learned counsel for the parties and ghave gone through the whole record carefully. On 26.2.2010, this Court while issuing notice of motion in Crl.M.No.M-5657 of 2010, passed the following order: Crl.M.No.M-5657 of 2010 (O&M) -2- “Crl.M.No.10217 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Main case Argues that it is a case of version and cross-version. Further argues that no injury has been attributed to petitioner no.1 and only injury attributed to petitioner no.2 is simple one on the left arm. Further argues that offence under Section 326 IPC has also been added just on account of fracture of finger and the same has not been attributed to any of the petitioners. Further argues that on the statement of Roshan Lal, father of the present petitioners, cross-case for offences under Sections 307, 326 IPC besides other offences has also been registered against complainant party. Notice of motion for 30.3.2010. 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 on 9.4.2010 while issuing notice of motion in Crl.M.No.M-9261 of 2010, passed the following order: “Crl.M.No.16627 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-9261 of 2010 Argues that it is a case of version and cross-version and that injury attributed to present petitioner is only on finger, which is not a grievous injury. Notice of motion for 18.5.2010. However, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he 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. ” It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioners that Crl.M.No.M-5657 of 2010 (O&M) -3- pursuant to the said orders, the petitioners have already joined the 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. In view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, orders dated 26.2.2010 and 9.4.2010, granting interim bail to petitioners- Sat Pal, Mastan and Roshan Lal, are, hereby confirmed subject to the compliance of conditions contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petitions stand disposed of accordingly. 18.5.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge