GURMIT SINGH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Taking into consideration the fact that, petitioner No.3- Anokha Singh son of Darbara Singh, has caused the grievous injury on the left side of the head of Harpreet Singh with his stick(dang), at the very outset, learned counsel intends to withdraw the instant petition for anticipatory on behalf of petitioner No.3, to enable him to file a petition for regular bail.

(2.) Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail filed by petitioner No.3-Anokha Singh, is hereby dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty, as prayed for.

(3.) Now adverting to the case of petitioner Nos.1 and 2, Gurmit Singh @ Manjit Singh and Parminder Singh @ Parwinder Singh, it is not a matter of dispute that, neither they have caused any injury to anyone, nor any overt-act or specific role is attributed to them in the FIR. They were present at the spot empty handed. They claimed that in fact the complainant-party inflicted injuries on the person of Buta Singh and on his(Buta Singh) statement, a cross-case was also registered against the complainant-party, but due to political pressure, the same was cancelled by the local police. Keeping in view the fact that since, neither any injury, nor any specific role or overt-act is attributed, so, petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail in this context.