IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-3136 of 2010 Date of Decision: February 11, 2010 Rachhpal Singh @ Kala @ Batti & Another .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Nandan Jindal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Rajni Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in cross case registered under DDR No.15 dated 21.10.2009 in case FIR No.57 dated 20.10.2009 under Sections 307, 341, 429, 148, 149 IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act registered with Police Station, Mehal Kalan, Barnala. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that it is a cross version case. The petitioners’ side is the author of the FIR. Crl. Misc. No. M-3136 of 2010 [2] Learned counsel for the respondent- State, on instructions from Ashok Kumar, Assistant Sub Inspector, in the context of incident states that fire-arm was used against Buta Singh. Buta Singh, however, has fled from the process of law. The investigating agency has not been able to arrest Buta Singh, therefore, the seat and extent of injury on the person of injured (Buta Singh) cannot be ascertained. It has also been admitted that petitioner has been in custody since 31.10.2009. Investigation has been concluded and challan has been filed. Conclusion of trial is likely to take time. Considering the fact that it is a cross version; Buta Singh (alleged injured) is not traceable and therefore extent of injury cannot be determined; investigation has been concluded; challan has been filed; and conclusion of trial is likely to take time, the petition is allowed. Bail to the satisfaction of Trial Court. (AJAI LAMBA) February 11, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?