2003 PLP 2536 (YLR)

Applicant Naveed Akhtar alias Chanda is facing trial for an offence under section 324/34, P.P.C. in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge (East), Judicial Complex, Karachi arising out of F.I.R. No.302 of 2002 of Police Station Soldier Bazar. Briefly stated the facts of the case as per F.I.R. lodged by complainant Muhammad Iqbal are that his son-in-law was dealing with the transport business. Accused Owais was notorious person of Muhallah and was absconder in a criminal case. He was arrested by the police several times on the ground of taking Bhatta torn peaceful persons of the Muhallah. Muhallah people were tired of him. On 6-11-2002 at 5-30 p.m. there was exchange of harsh words in between his son- in-law and the said Owais. On 7-11-2002 at 6-00 p.m., complainant was informed by one Irfan that accused Owais, Javed and Naveed Akhtar had caused Chhuri blows to his son -in-law. Complainant went to the venue and found that his son-in-law was lying injured. He was removed to hospital and the case was registered against the accused. The present applicant was arrested on 11-11-2002. After completion of investigation, police submitted challan and the case is pending trial in the aforesaid Court. I have heard Mr. Ejaz Khattak learned counsel for applicant and Mr. Habibur Rashid learned counsel appearing for the State. It is argued that the allegations levelled against applicant Naveed Akhtar alias Chanda are that he caught hold of accused Abdul Qahar whereas Javed and to the injured. It there was absolutely no need to the injured and in fact the present applicant has been falsely implicated. So far complicity of present applicant under the provisions of section 34, P.P.C. is concerned that is yet to be established at the time of trial. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the applicant. It is argued that case of applicant is distinguishable from accused Javed and Owais. Mr. Habibur Rashid learned counsel appearing for State has opposed the bail plea of the applicant. The record shows that complement Muhammad Iqbal is not an eye-witness details of incident had been conveyed to him by one Irfan. Police statement of Irfan shows that he has not seen the accused causing injuries to injured Abdul Qahar. Police statement of injured Abdul Qahar discloses that he was given Chhuri blows by accused, and Javed whereas the present accused them and caught hold of him. The complicity of applicant under vicarious liability, is yet to be established when the evidence is recorded. Admittedly, he has not the injured. The statement of injured does not show anywhere that the applicant was armed with Chhuri. He is in custody since 11-11-2002. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from his possession. His case is altogether different from accused Javed and Owais. Under these circumstances, the case of accused comes under the scope of further inquiry as contemplated by section 497(2), Cr.P.C. He is granted bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./N-134/K Bail granted.