JUDGMENT Mr. Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.: (Oral) - As identical points for determination for the grant of regular bail are involved, therefore, I propose to decide the indicated petitions, arising out of the same case/FIR, vide this common order in order to avoid the repetition of the facts. 2. The petitioners-accused have filed the separate petitions for the grant of regular bail, in a case registered against them along with their other six co-accused, vide FIR No.88 dated 7.3.2012, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC by the police of Police Station City Thanesar, District Kurukshetra, invoking the provisions of section 439 Cr.PC. 3. Notices of the petitions were issued to the State. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after deep consideration of the entire matter, to my mind, the present petitions deserve to be accepted in this regard. 5. The prosecution claimed that the accused have prepared a fake power of attorney of Om Parkash. The name of petitioner Satish is not mentioned in the FIR. Petitioner Joginder Singh is stated to have only attested the general power of attorney. No other specific role or overt act is attributed to them. The petitioners are not the beneficiaries of the general power of attorney. Petitioner Joginder Singh was arrested on 14.6.2012, whereas petitioner Satish was arrested on 6.5.2012, since then, they are in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served to be further detained them in jail. It is not a matter of dispute that Ishwar Singh, co-accused of the petitioners, has already been allowed the concession of regular bail by this Court, vide order dated 4.9.2012 (Annexure P2) under the similar set of circumstances. All the offences alleged against the accused are triable by the Court of Magistrate. Even, since the charges have not yet been framed against the accused, so, the conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time. 6. All the offences alleged against the accused are triable by the Court of Magistrate. Even, since the charges have not yet been framed against the accused, so, the conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time. 6. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration that no specific role or overt-act is attributed to the petitioners, totality of other facts & circumstances, emanating from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the main case, the instant petitions are hereby accepted. The petitioners are directed to be released on regular bail on their furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court. 7. Needless to mention that nothing observed, here-in-above, would reflect, in any manner, on merits during the trial of the main case, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petitions in this relevant direction.