1987 PLP 3034 (MLD)

Shameem Abbas Bukhari on behalf of Syed Ali Raza for Petitioners. Afaz-ud-Din for the State. Mian Nazir Akhtar for the Complainant. Irshad Hussain Agha Hussain, Hussain Shah and Nawaz petitioners have moved this petition for bail in a case registered against them and their co-accused under sections 148, 302 and 307/149 P. P. C. The allegations are that on 19-5-1977 at 9 a. m. the petitioners and their co-accused after having armed themselves with firearms and blunt and sharp-edged weapons launched attack on the complainant party in order to take forcible possession of the land. In respect of the said land the Civil Court Jhang had issued a stay order in favour of the complainant party. Faiz Abbas accused fired his gun causing injuries to Muhammad Bakhsh, Bashir Ahmad, Faiz Bakhsh Mitha and Muhammad Nawaz as a result of which Muhammad Bakhsh died at the spot and Bashir Ahmed expired in the hospital on the 23rd of May 1977. The other accused including the petitioners, caused injuries to as many as nine persons who are prosecution witnesses in this case.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are not alleged to have caused any injury to the deceased persons and the only allegation against them is that they caused only simple injuries to the P.Ws. therefore, they are entitled to the concession of bail. He further submits that the accused party also sustained injuries at the hands of the complainant party which shows that there was a free fight between the parties and in that view of the matter each accused will be liable for his individual act. On the other hand the learned counsel for the State and the complainant contend that the stay order issued by the civil Court at Jhang was challenged by the accused party, firstly in the District Court and then in the High Court but the same was maintained in favour of the complainant party. They state that the accused took the law into their own hand causing death of two persons and injuries to nine persons by naked aggression, therefore, they are not entitled to bail.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners is not in a position to controvert the contention that a stay order was issued by the civil Court in favour of the complainant party and was maintained in their favour by the District Court as well as the High Court. The petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and a specific role has been attributed to them. The allegations ex facie show that there was a pre-concert. In the Circumstances, I do not find any substance in this petition and it is hereby dismissed. S. G. D./I-29/l. Petition dismissed.