1989 PLP 4059 (MLD)

Awais Naseem for the State. A.W. Butt for the Complainant. This is an application for post‑arrest bail moved by Aman Ullah petitioner who is an accused in a case under section 307, P.P.C. registered at, Police Station Baghbanpura, Gujranwala vide F.I.R. No. 75, dated 18‑3‑1989.

2. Prosecution case in nutshell is that a suit (for return of dowry) filad by the complainant's sister against her husband, the petitioner herein was decreed by Civil Court. A bailiff of the Civil Court accompanied by Muhammad Farooq complainant approached the petitioner for the execution of the decree. Petitioner resisted the execution, abused bailiff and gave him beating. He then brought a pistol and started Firing as a result whereof one Muhammad Sadiq, a passerby was injured. Petitioner was arrested on 3‑4‑1989. He applied for bail in the Sessions Court but his application was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 2‑5‑1989. Hence this petition.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel appearing for the complainant and the State. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the case. Muhammad Sadiq P.W. was in fact injured by a shot fired by Abdul Qayyum, an accused in the cross‑case. It is further contended that Muhammad Sadiq, injured P.W. has not supported the prosecution case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Farooq complainant and his brother Abdul Qayyum who are accused in the cross‑case under section 307/323/34,'P.P.C. registered at the instance of the petitioner's uncle have already been allowed bail by this Court.

4. A.S.I. present in Court with record states that the statement of Muhammad Sadiq P.W. has not been recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. because he was not supporting the prosecution case. He further states that Muhammad Sadiq has in fact submitted an affidavit wherein he has deposed that he was injured as a result of firing of Abdul Qayyum accused in the cross‑case.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant points out that during the investigation of this case, both the parties had agreed to refer the matter to one Dr. Abdul Qayyum and to be bound by his decision. The said Dr. Abdul Qayyum has made a statement on the Holy Qur'an that it was Aman Ullah petitioner who resorted to the firing with his pistol. I have perused the statement of Dr. Abdul Qayyum photo copy whereof has been placed on record today by the A.S.I. It is not stated therein that the injury suffered by Muhammad Sadiq was‑caused by Aman Ullah. The statement of Dr. Abdul Qayyum, therefore, does 1, 4 not appear to be of much help to the prosecution. 6. 1 In view of what has been said above and particularly the fact that the injured P.W. has not supported the prosecution and a cross‑case also stands registered against the complainant party in respect of the occurrence in dispute, case against the petitioner appears to be one of further enquiry. He is, therefore, entitled to be released on bail. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties each in the ' like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Gujranwala. N.H.Q./A‑744/L Bail allowed.