IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-26202 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 18.9.200 Babli ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present: Mr.A.S.Sullar, Advocate for the petitioner. .... MAHESH GROVER, J. Crl.Misc.No.47537 of 2009 Crl.Misc. is allowed as prayed for. Crl.Misc.No.M-26202 of 2009 Notice of motion. Mr. B.B.S.Teji, Asstt. Advocate General, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the State of Punjab. This is a petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for release of the petitioner in terms thereof in a case registered vide FIR No.234 dated 15.7.2009 under Sections 326/427/323/342/447/511/148/149 IPC, at Police Station Samana, District Patiala. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that they had obtained injunction order from the civil court to protect their Crl.Misc.No.M-26202 of 2009 (O&M) -2- possession and the complainant party tried to usurp such possession forcibly and in the process both the parties have received injuries. The case of the petitioner is that they were the victims and that the question as to who were the aggressors is likely to be decided during the course of evidence. According to the allegations the petitioner got simple injuries with blunt weapon on non-vital part but it does not conform to the allegations as the petitioner in connected case is said to be armed with Takua. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that possibility of false implication cannot be ruled out as the injuries could have been self inflicted also. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has contended that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail as she had participated in a violent occurrence. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusing the material on record, I am of the considered opinion that the present petition deserves to be allowed as the petitioner has been attributed an injury with a blunt weapon, even though she was allegedly armed with a Takua. The injury is also simple in nature and given the background of the incident the possibility of false implication cannot entirely be ruled out. Consequently, it is directed that in the event of her arrest, the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. The petitioner shall, however, joint the investigation to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer and any violation of the terms of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.shall entitled the complainant to move an appropriate application for cancellation Crl.Misc.No.M-26202 of 2009 (O&M) -3- of bail. Nothing said shall be construed to be an expression on merits of the case. Petition stands allowed. 18.9.2009 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss