JUDGMENT Mr. Ram Chand Gupta, J.: (Oral) - The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no.214 dated 26.12.2009, under Sections 307/324/326/325/323/427/148/149 IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act, 1959 (Section 27 of Arms Act has been deleted later on), registered at police station Sadar Sangrur, District Sangrur. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur dismissing anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioners. 3. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 10.10.2012 passed the following order:- “CRM No.59793 of 2012 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRM No.M- 31232 of 2012 Contends that another brother of petitioners, namely, Jaspal Singh was killed by the present complainant and some other persons and regarding that, FIR no. 20 dated 25.08.2006 under Sections 302/307/341/ 324/323/148/149/120B was registered in police station Sunam against complainant and some other persons at the instance of petitioners. It is further submitted that names of present petitioners have been mentioned just to pressurise them to compromise in the said FIR. It is further submitted that on the basis of same, inquiry was conducted by Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division, Sangrur and petitioners were found innocent and they were kept in column no.2 in the report filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that they have now been summoned to face trial by learned trial court by allowing application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. filed by the prosecution. It is further submitted that as per version of FIR, only simple injuries have been attributed to present petitioners to injured-Kuldeep. It is also submitted that though injuries were attributed with Gandasa however, the nature of injuries are such that the same cannot be caused by Gandasa. It is further submitted that the petitioners are ready to appear before learned trial court and face trial. Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab for 06.11.2012. However, in the meantime, petitioners are directed to appear before learned trial Court within two weeks from today and in case, they so appear and apply for bail, they be admitted to interim bail by learned trial court subject to any conditions that may deem to be imposed by it.” 4. Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab for 06.11.2012. However, in the meantime, petitioners are directed to appear before learned trial Court within two weeks from today and in case, they so appear and apply for bail, they be admitted to interim bail by learned trial court subject to any conditions that may deem to be imposed by it.” 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for petitioners that they have already appeared before learned trial court on 20.10.2012 pursuant to said order and admitted to interim bail. Copy of the order dated 20.10.2012 has also been placed on record. It is further stated by learned counsel for petitioners that they undertake to appear before learned trial Court on each and every date of hearing and face trial. 5. This fact has not been disputed by learned counsel for respondent-State, on instruction from ASI Jarnail Singh. 6. There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioners are likely to abscond or that they are likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail. 7. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Manjit Singh and Gurdeep Singh @Deepa is accepted and order dated 10.10.2012 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioners is, hereby, made absolute subject to any conditions that may deem to be imposed by learned trial Court. 8. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.