- (1.) As identical points of law and facts are involved, therefore, I propose to decide the indicated petitions i.e. CRM No. M-29674 of 2014 titled as "Gurbinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr." (for brevity "the 1st petition") and CRM No.M-29687 of 2014 titled as "Balraj Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors" (for short "2nd petition"), arising out of the same incident/cross cases/FIR/DDR, vide this common order to avoid the repetition of facts.
(2.) The epitome of the facts & material, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petitions and emanating from the record, is that initially, in the wake of statement of complainant Balraj Singh s/o Nirmal Singh, respondent No.2 (for brevity "the complainant"), a criminal case was registered against petitioners-accused Gurbinder Singh son of Balkar Singh and others (in 1st petition), vide FIR No.129 dated 16.11.2013 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable u/ss 148, 323, 427, 452 & 506 read with section 149 IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of The Arms Act by the police of Police Station Mehta, District Amritsar.
(3.) Sequelly, the prosecution claimed that the accused's party (in 1st petition) also sustained injuries in the same very incident and a cross criminal case arising out of the same incident, was also registered against petitioners-accused Balraj Singh s/o Nirmal Singh and others (in 2nd petition), in pursuance of the statement of Gurbinder Singh, by way of DDR No.22 dated 18.11.2013 (Annexure P2) for the commission of offences punishable u/ss 148, 323 and 326 read with section 149 IPC by the police of same very police station.;