- (1.) As identical questions of law and facts are involved, therefore, I propose to decide the above indicated petitions, bearing CRM No.M-16863 of 2012 titled as "Harsimran Singh alias Hobby & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr." (for brevity "the 1 st case") and CRM No.M- 29036 of 2012 titled as "Samual Masih & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr." (for short "the 2 nd case"), arising out of the same very FIR/cross case, by means of this common judgment in order to avoid the repetition.
(2.) Tersely, the facts & material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for deciding the instant petitions and emanating from the record, are that, initially, in the wake of complaint of complainant Samual Masih -respondent No.2 (in short "the complainant") (in 1 st case), a criminal case was registered against petitioners-accused Harsimran Singh alias Hobby and others, by virtue of FIR No.84 dated 27.4.2012 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 323, 324 and 341 read with section 34 IPC (the offence punishable u/s 326 IPC was lateron added) by the police of Police Station Dina Nagar, District Gurdaspur.
(3.) At the same time and during the course of same occurrence, Harsimran Singh and Baljit Singh @ Bala also sustained injuries at the hands of complainant party. Consequently, in pursuance of statement (Annexure P1) of Harsimran Singh s/o Manjit Singh, a cross criminal case was registered against petitioners-accused Samual Masih and others (in 2 nd case) for the commission of offences punishable under sections 148, 323, 324, 341, 379, & 427 read with section 149 IPC, by way of same very FIR and by the same Police Station.;