Judgment Baldev Singh, J. 1. This petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to Sanjay Kumar - accused-petitioner in case FIR No. 657 dated 3.9.2002 registered under Sections 302, 324, 120-B read with Section 34 IPC at Police Station City Panipat. 2. The FIR was registered in this case on the statement of Sunil son of Balram resident of 191/8, Panipat. As per version of the complainant Sunil, his father Balram (deceased) ran a shop under the name and style of "Balram Durga Kulfi" in Halwai Ahata. On 2.9.2002 at about 10.15 P.M. after closing the shop, he and his father were starting the motorcycle for going to their house, two young boys came out of the adjoining street. One of them gave a knife blow to his father. Sunil tried to catch hold that young boy, upon which, the other boy gave a knife blow on his left arm pit. Sunil and his father raised alarm for their safety. Billu and Mohan came there from the adjoining Halwai shop. The two boys ran into the post office street. One of them was wearing a sky blue coloured shirt. Both of them were tall. According to Sunil, he could identify them if they appear before him. Balram was taken to Maharaj Aggarsain Hospital, Panipat. He expired due to the injury. 3. During investigation, the assailants were identified as Sanjay Kumar, accused-petitioner and his co-accused Anuj. It was also found that Radhey Shyam, third accused had hatched up a conspiracy for causing injuries to Balram and he was standing at some distance at the time of occurrence. Statements of PWs Subhash and Inder Singh were recorded on 3.11.2003. The accused-petitioner and his co-accused were arrested on 3.11.2003. 4. It is argued that the accused-petitioner Sanjay Kumar and Anuj and Radhey Shyam, co-accused were arrested on 3.11.2003 after lapse of many months. Occurrence had taken place on 2.9.2002. The accused-petitioner had given injury to Sunil-complainant in the left arm pit. He did not cause any injury to the deceased. Injury to Sunil is simple in nature. The accused-petitioner Sanjay Kumar and his co-accused had refused to participate in the test identification parade, because they were shown by the police to the witness who were supposed to identify them. 5. Ld. counsel for the accused-petitioner Sanjay Kumar argued that he is in custody since 3.11.2003. Injury to Sunil is simple in nature. The accused-petitioner Sanjay Kumar and his co-accused had refused to participate in the test identification parade, because they were shown by the police to the witness who were supposed to identify them. 5. Ld. counsel for the accused-petitioner Sanjay Kumar argued that he is in custody since 3.11.2003. He did not cause any injury to the deceased. Injury inflicted by him on the person of Sunil is simple in nature and is on a non- vital part of the body. In these circumstances, he should be given the concession of bail. Ld. counsel also cited the case of Om Parkash and others v. State of Haryana, 2003(1) CCJ 550. It was a murder case under Section 302/307 IPC. No injury to the deceased was attributed to the petitioner, therein and the injury attributed to the petitioner was qua the complainant only. The petitioner was in custody for the last nine months. Bail was allowed to him. In Criminal Appeal No. 772-DB of 2004 titled "Yashpal and others v. State of Haryana" Ram Roop-convict was allowed bail and it was stated that he had given lathi blow on the thigh of Smt. Sharbati. In Criminal Misc. No. 40089-M of 2003 titled `Suresh and another v. State of Haryana, the petitioners were allowed bail as it was contended by their counsel that they had given simple injuries to the witnesses. It was a murder case under FIR No. 43 dated 26.3.2003 under Sections 302, 148 and 149 IPC. 6. In the circumstances, the petition is allowed and the petitioner Sanjay Kumar is granted bail on his furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Panipat, who on acceptance of such bonds would issue the release orders.