JUDGMENT Mr. Ram Chand Gupta, J.: (Oral) - This order will dispose of both the aforementioned petitions filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no. 128 dated 06.07.2011, under Section 382 IPC, registered at police station Sadar Jagraon, District Ludhiana (Rural). 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, Ludhiana dismissing bail applications filed on behalf of the petitioners. 3. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 18.05.2012 in Crl. Misc. No.M-14869 of 2012 passed the following order:- “Crl.M.No.30006 of 2012 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-14869 of 2012 Contends that name of petitioner has not been mentioned in the FIR and that he is being falsely implicated on the statement of main-accused Davinder Singh with whom complainant was having dispute. It is also contended that Davinder Singh has already been arrested and entire recovery including .32 bore revolver belonging to complainant has also been effected. It is further contended that no motive has been attributed to present petitioner-accused. Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab, for 2.7.2012. However, in the meantime, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he 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. This Court while issuing notice of motion on 29.05.2012 in Crl. Misc. No.M-15597 of 2012 passed the following order:- “Crl.M.No.31417 of 2012 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-15597 of 2012 Contends that name of the petitioner has not been mentioned in the FIR and that he is being falsely implicated in this case on the statement of main accused Davinder Singh with whom complainant was having dispute. It is further submitted that Davinder Singh has already been arrested and entire recovery including .32 bore revolver belonging to complainant has also been effected. It is also contended that no motive has been attributed to present petitioner-accused and that his case is similar to co-accused Ravinder Singh, who has already been granted interim bail by this Court. Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab, for 2.7.2012. It is also contended that no motive has been attributed to present petitioner-accused and that his case is similar to co-accused Ravinder Singh, who has already been granted interim bail by this Court. Notice of motion to Advocate General, Punjab, for 2.7.2012. However, in the meantime, petitioner is directed to join the investigation and in case he is arrested, he 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. To be heard alongwith Crl.M.No.M-14869 of 2012.” 5. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that they have already joined the investigation pursuant to said orders dated 18.05.2012 and 29.05.2012. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail applications filed on behalf of Ravinder Singh and Harbans Singh are accepted and orders dated 18.05.2012 and 29.05.2012 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioners are, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. 9. Both the petitions stand disposed of accordingly. ---------0.B.S.0------------