ORDER : The instant petitions have been maintained by the petitioners under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking their release in case FIR No. 07 of 2021, dated 03.01.2021, under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Sadar, District Shimla, H.P. 2. As per the averments made in the petitions, the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. They are permanent residents of District Shimla, thus neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping them behind the bars for an unlimited period, so they be released on bail. 3. Police report stands filed. Tersely the facts of the case, as emerge from the records, are that on 02.01.2021, around 10:39 p.m., Shri Gagan Beuliya (complainant) informed the police of Police Station Sadar, Shimla that his friend Arun Kumar told him that some persons thrashed his father near Lalpani School. On receipt of the information, police visited the place and found that Ram Lal, father of the complainant, has already been shifted to IGMC, Shimla and thereafter the police reached IGMC Shimla and found that Ram Lal was admitted in emergency ward. On a formal inquiry by the Investigating Officer, Arun Kumar, son of Ram Lal, disclosed that near Lalpani School, Sagar and Sandeep @ Kaali (petitioners herein) mercilessly thrashed his father and also thrown him below the railing, due to which his father sustained multiple injuries and injury on his head. At that point of time the injured was unconscious. Accordingly, the Investigating Officer moved an application for conducting the medical upon the injured, so the Medical Officer conducted the medical and opined that the injured is fit for make a statement. On 03.01.2021 Ram Lal succumbed to his injuries. Upon this, the police machinery was set into motion. Police registered a case under the apt Sections of IPC and the investigation commenced. Police visited the spot of occurrence, collected scientific evidence, recorded the statements of the witnesses and prepared the spot map. The petitioners were arrested and medically examined. Medico Legal Certificates of the petitioners reveal that on the day of occurrence they consumed liquor. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail applications of the petitioners be dismissed. Police visited the spot of occurrence, collected scientific evidence, recorded the statements of the witnesses and prepared the spot map. The petitioners were arrested and medically examined. Medico Legal Certificates of the petitioners reveal that on the day of occurrence they consumed liquor. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail applications of the petitioners be dismissed. In case the petitioners, at this stage, are enlarged on bail, there is every possibility that they may flee from justice or tamper with the prosecution witnesses, so the bail applications may be dismissed. 4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent/State and gone through the records, carefully. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the instant case. He has further argued that the petitioners were not at all involved in the alleged offence. The petitioners are neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, as they are permanent residents of District Shimla, H.P. He has argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioners behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when investigation is complete, nothing remains to be recovered at the instance of the petitioners. He has argued that the petitioners cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when investigation is complete, the custody of the petitioners is not at all required, so the bail applications may be allowed and the petitioners be enlarged on bail. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioners have committed heinous crime and the petitioners were actively involved in the commission of the crime. He has further argued that in case the petitioners, at this stage, are enlarged on bail they may tamper with the prosecution evidence or flee from justice, so the petitions may be dismissed. 6. In rebuttal the learned Counsel for the petitioners has argued that the petitioners are behind the bars for the last more than one year and cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, especially when investigation is complete, challan stands presented in the learned Trial Court, nothing remains to be recovered at the instance of the petitioners, so the custody of the petitioners is not at all required by the police. He has argued that considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the bail petitions may be allowed and the petitioners be enlarged on bail. 7. At this stage, considering the facts that the trial is in its initial and crucial stage, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been perpetrated by the petitioners, the nature and heinousness of the alleged offence, in case they are enlarged on bail, also the fact that they are in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence and in a position to flee from justice, the petitioners are local residents of the place and there is anger in the society for them, so there is eminent danger to their lives as well, trial is yet to begin and the petitioners in case at this stage enlarged on bail may threaten the prosecution witnesses and thwart the judicial process and also considering all the facets of the case and without elaborately discussing them at this stage, this Court finds that the instant is not a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioners on bail is required to be exercised in their favour. 8. In view of the foregoing discussions, the petitions are without merits, deserve dismissal and are accordingly dismissed. 9. Needless to say that the observations made hereinabove are only confined for the adjudication of the instant petitions and shall have no bearing, whatsoever, on the merits of the main case, which shall be adjudicated on its own.