1985 P Cr (PLP)

Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa for Petitioner. Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for the State. Asif Saeed Khan Khosa for the Complainant. Ghulam Sarwar petitioner and four others are accused of offence under sections 302/307/149 and 148, P.P.C.

2. It is alleged that petitioner armed with a Katti, his co‑accused Ali Bakhsh also carrying a Katti, his co‑accused Ali Sher and Ghulam Akbar with a Lathi each and co‑accused Abdul Sattar empty‑handed attacked and caused death of Muhammad Nawaz and murderous assault on Nur Muhammad and Nazar Muhammad P.Ws. Abdul Sattar co‑accused of the petitioner allegedly held the deceased when Ali Bakhsh gave a Kati blow to the deceased on abdomen and petitioner gave a Kati blow on hand of the deceased. Ghulam Akbar also gave Lathi blow on head of the deceased. Ali Akbar and Ghulam Akbar with Lathis allegedly caused injuries to Nazar Muhammad P.W. and Ali Bakhsh also injured Nur Muhammad P.W.

3. It is submitted that petitioner did not participate in the occur rence, that no recovery had been effected from petitioner, that petitioner was on duty in the school at the time of occurrence, that Ali Sher co‑accused suffered injuries including fracture of skull in the same occurrence but prosecution did not explain it and that motive alleged by the prosecution was a weak one. It was stressed that although petitioner allegedly delivered a Katti blow on hand of the deceased the medical evidence did not disclose any sharp‑edged injury on hand of the deceased and belied the ocular evidence. Learned counsel for the State and for the complainant have opposed the release of petitioner on bail.

4. The motive is alleged only against the petitioner who had an altercation with Nur Muhammad about an hour before the present occur rence in which Muhammad Nawaz lost his life and had left the place with threats of dire consequences. Petitioner has not produced any material so far during investigation that he was attending the school at the time of occurrence. There can be error in observing the seat of injuries by the petitioner to the deceased. F.I.R. was promptly lodged without availing any time for deliberations. It is too early to conclude that petitioner was not present and did not participate in the occurrence. On the material available on record prima facie reasonable grounds exist that petitioner is guilty of the offence alleged against him. The application for bail is rejected. S. G. D. Bail declined.