2008 P Cr (PLP)

MALIK SAEED EJAZ, J.

Rahim Bakhsh-petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.202, registered at Police Station Taunsa, on 2-7-2007, for offences under sections 337-A(ii)/ 337-A(vi)/34, P.P.C.

2. According to F.I.R., the role attributed to the petitioner is that he gave one brick blow on the forehead of Ghulam Farid, brother of the complainant.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while the petitioner armed with brick inflicted brick blow at the head of Ghulam Farid/P.W. and the injury sustained by Ghulam Farid was declared as "Shajja-i-Damighah" there was no intention of the petitioner to cause serious injury to Ghulam Farid, whose statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 20-7-2007, in which Ghulam Farid stated that the petitioner had caused injury on his chest as such injury attributed in the F.I.R. is not corroborated by the statement of Ghulam Farid/injured; other co-accused namely Mukhtar and Manzoor, who were shown armed with pistols have been declared innocent by the police, thus, veracity of the statement of complainant is not beyond doubt; the injured was admitted in the hospital on 1-7-2007 and he was discharged on 5-7-2007 but his statement was recorded on 20-7-2007 i.e. after delay of 15 days. of his discharge, which also creates doubt.

4. Conversely, the learned D.P.-G. assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant submits that petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R.; motive is also attributed to him and injury caused to Ghulam Farid is clearly assigned to the petitioner, which has been declared as "Shajja-i-Damighah", which is punishable with 14 years' imprisonment, as such offence falls within the ambit of prohibitory clause.

5. After considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record in hand, it has been noticed that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is shown equipped with brick. He allegedly caused injury to Ghulam Farid with the brick. Brick is not a weapon, which can be chosen by an accused for commission of offence usually. According to F.I.R., the petitioner .has made only single attempt. He did not repeat the attempt. Statement of Ghulam Farid injured was recorded by the police under section 161, Cr.P.C. on 20-7-2007 wherein he disclosed that the petitioner had caused injury to him on his chest but as per medical evidence no such injury has been found on the chest of Ghulam Farid. His statement is directly in conflict with the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. The petitioner is behind the bars since July, 2007 and trial has not yet commenced. Thus, nobody can be kept behind the bars for indefinite period. Nature of injury as declared by the doctor also creates doubt, as the injured remained admit in the hospital only for four days after receiving such serious injury.

6. Keeping in view the above facts, I am inclined to admit the petitioner to bail, subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rupees two lacs (Rs.2,00,000), with one surety, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.H.Q./R-25/L Bail allowed.