IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 9267 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 17, 2010. Sunny @Sandeep Kumar and another ...... PETITIONERS Versus State of Punjab. ...... RESPONDENT CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. J.B.S.Gill, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.15, dated 26.01.2010 under Sections 323/324/325/326/506/34 IPC, registered at Police Station Mahilpur, District Hoshiarpur. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. On request of learned counsel for the petitioners, this petition qua petitioner No.1 – Sunny @Sandeep Kumar was dismissed as withdrawn on 08.04.2010. So far as petitioner No.2 – Maddi @Rajiv Kumar is CRM No.M-9267 of 2010 concerned, this Court while issuing notice of motion on 08.04.2010 passed the following order:- “Crl.M.No.18938 of 2010 Application is allowed. Annexure P1 is taken on record. Application stands disposed of accordingly. Crl.M.No.16632 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-9267 of 2010 Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioners requests for withdrawal of this petition on behalf of petitioner No.1 – Sunny alias Sandeep Kumar. The present petition qua petitioner No.1 – Sunny alias Sandeep Kumar stands dismissed as withdrawn Notice of motion of regarding petitioner No.2 – Maddi alias Rajiv Kumar for 17.5.2010. However, petitioner No.2 – Maddi alias Rajiv Kumar 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 petitioner No.2 has already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 08.04.2010 and moreover, the matter has also since been compromised with the complainant. It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State, on instruction from HC.Lakhwinder Singh, that petitioner No.2 – Maddi @Rajiv Kumar has joined the investigation and that he is no more required for any custodial interrogation. 2 CRM No.M-9267 of 2010 There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner No.2 is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application qua petitioner No.2 – Maddi @Rajiv Kumar is accepted and order dated 08.04.2010 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner No.2 is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) May 17, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3