TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA,J. - (1.) The instant petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.186 dated 05.07.2015, under Sections 323, 341, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 307, 323, 148 of IPC added later on, registered at Police Station Sadar Narnaul, Mahendergarh.
(2.) Briefly, it may be noticed that FIR came to be registered on the statement of Dharmender Singh in relation to an occurrence dated 05.07.2015. Complainant stated that he was running a provision store in the village and at about 10:30 a.m., he along with his son, namely, Rajender was proceeding to his residence for taking a meal. Rajender was stated to be walking ahead of the complainant. Upon reaching home, complainant noticed that his son was not present and having come out of the house met Om Parkash in the street who informed him that Sandeep and Rajiv (present petitioners) had caught hold of the hand of Rajender and have taken him into their "Baithak". Complainant has stated that upon having opened the door of the "Baithak" and he found Rajiv and Sandeep inflicting blows upon his son Rajender with Sarias and Surta wife of Subash and Meena wife of Rajiv were also given leg blows. Thereupon complainant along with assistance of others rescued his son and having arranged a vehicle brought him to Civil Hospital, Narnaul.
(3.) On 14.09.2015, when this petition came up for preliminary hearing, notice of motion was issued in the following terms:- "Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present FIR is a counter-blast of the complaint made by wife of petitioner No.1 as she was molested but no FIR was registered. Subsequently, the FIR has been registered against the petitioners and at the most, it can be said that the occurrence took place because of incident reported by wife of petitioner No.1. Learned counsel also submits that all the injuries except injuries No.5 and 6 are simple in nature. Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Sulinder Kumar, A.A.G., Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. Notice on behalf of complainant has been accepted by Mr. Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that the injured was discharged from the hospital after ten days and as per opinion of the doctor, the cumulative effect of the injuries caused to the injured is that his kidney has damaged. Learned counsel for the complainant also submits that the complainant is being threatened to compromise the dispute and thereafter, the FIR was also registered. Adjourned to 22.09.2015. Meanwhile, arrest of the petitioners shall remain stayed. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to supply two copies of the petition to learned counsel for the respondent-State during course of the day." ;