JUDGMENT Mr. Mehinder Singh Sullar, J. (Oral) - As identical points for determination for the grant of regular bail are involved, therefore, I propose to dispose of the indicated petitions, arising out of the same FIR, vide this common order in order to avoid the repetition of the facts. 2. Petitioners Gurmeet Kaur wife of Baljinder Singh, Jaswinder Kaur wife of Sukhdev Singh and Pal Singh son of Dharam Singh have directed the instant separate petitions for the grant of regular bail, in a case registered against them, by means of FIR No.194 dated 21.9.2012 (Annexure P1), for the commission of an offence punishable under section 304 read with section 34 IPC by the police of Police Station Beas, District Amritsar, 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 considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petitions deserve to be accepted in this respect. 5. Concisely, the prosecution claimed that Mohinder Singh, who was a mentally retarded person, suddenly entered into the house of petitioners. They took him as a thief and caused injuries to him. Subsequently, he succumbed to his injuries on the way to hospital. In the wake of information received by Inspector Harkrishan Singh, the instant case was registered against the petitioners-accused. Petitioners Gurmeet Kaur and Jaswinder Kaur are daughters-in-law of petitioner Pal Singh. It would be a moot point to be decided during the course of trial by the trial Court, as to whether the facts emanating from the FIR, constitute any pointed offence or not? Moreover, petitioners Gurmeet Kaur and Jaswinder Kaur are ladies, whereas petitioner Pal Singh is an old person of 65 years. 6. Be that as it may, the petitioners were arrested on 22.9.2012, since then, they are in judicial custody and no useful purpose would be served to further detain them in jail. There is no history of their previous involvement in any such criminal case. Even, since the prosecution has examined only one witness, so, the conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time. 7. There is no history of their previous involvement in any such criminal case. Even, since the prosecution has examined only one witness, so, the conclusion of trial will naturally take a long time. 7. In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the totality of facts & circumstances, oozing out from the record, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the cases of either side, during the course of trial of main case, the present petitions for regular bail are hereby accepted. The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their furnishing adequate bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. 8. Needless to mention here that nothing observed, here-in-above, would reflect on the merits of the main case, in any manner, during the course of trial as the same has been so recorded for the limited purpose of deciding the instant petitions for regular bail. ---------0.B.S.0------------