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.19 dated 4.2.2012 under Sections 452, 323, 324, 148 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station City Roopnagar, District Roopnagar. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Sessions Judge, Ropar dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioners. 3. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 29.3.2012 passed the following order:- “Crl.M.No.18577 of 2012 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-8865 of 2012 Contends that no specific injury has been attributed to present petitioners. It is also contended that it is a case of version and cross-version and even as per version in the FIR, scuffle had taken between the parties and both the parties sustained injuries. It is also submitted that three persons from the side of petitioners also sustained injuries and two of them already arrested. Further submitted that all the injuries except one, which is on the nose are simple in nature. It is also submitted that case of present petitioners is similar to Jamil and others, who have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 21.3.2012 passed in Crl.M.No.M-8865 of 2012. Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab, for 24.4.2012. However, in the meantime, petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in case they are arrested, they shall be released on interim bail by the Arresting Officer to his satisfaction subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.” 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that they have already joined the investigation pursuant to said order dated 29.3.2012. 5. It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State that petitioners have joined the investigation and that they are no more required for any custodial interrogation. 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. 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 petitioners Abdul Gafoor and Sammi is accepted and order dated 29.3.2012 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioners is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. ---------0.B.S.0------------