2004 P Cr (PLP)

Muhammad Ishaque Khoso for Applicants. Mashooq Ali Sarno, Asstt. A.‑G. for the State. Date of hearing: 7th July, 2003 Applicants have sought bail in a case for an offence punishable under sections 353, 147, 148, 149 and 324, P.P.C. and 17(3), Offences Against Property (EOH) Ordinance. The allegations as per F.I.R. briefly stated, are that complainant Allah Bux and three other constables were posted at Moolchand Check Post. On 20‑4‑2003 while the ‑complainant and P.C. Muhammad Qasim were on patrol, they spotted three suspected persons and followed them and went towards the house of Khoso community. In support of the suspects, accused Nawaz Khoso armed with pistol, Azeem Khoso and Siddiqye Khoso armed with hatchets and seven unidentified persons came out of the houses and from amongst them‑ Nawaz fired from his pistol while Azeem and Siddique inflicted sharp sided hatchet blows upon the complainant. It is further alleged that the others .caused Lathi blows to P.C. Muhammad Qasim. The motorcycle of police party was also snatched forcibly. It is the case of prosecution that the motorcycle was secured from house of Nawaz who was shown as absconder in the challan. I have heard Mr: Muhammad Ishaque Khoso and Mr. Mashooq Ali Samo and perused the papers. The learned State Counsel pointed out that only three persons have been challaned in this case and hatchet has been secured from Siddique. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that sharp sided hatchet blow is attributed to the applicants but the injury on the head of complainant, as per medical certificate, is caused by a hard and blunt substance, therefore, the conflict between medical and oral evidence be resolved in favour of accused and they may be extended benefit of doubt. The learned State Counsel opposed the bail. The allegation that P.C. Qasim was also given Lathi blows is not supported by medical evidence. The blows are ascribed to Azeem and Siddique both, but there is only one injury caused with hard and blunt substance. The recovery of hatchet has been made from Siddique but as far the case of Azeem is concerned there is no recovery from him. In the circumstances, the injury on forehead being vital part of the body cannot be overlooked. The recovery of crime weapon is from Siddique alone. The case of Azeem would require further inquiry; he is, therefore, granted bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in sum of Rs:50,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional Registrar of this Court. While dismissing the application for bail on behalf of Muhammad Siddique it is directed that the trial Court should examine both the eye‑witnesses within a period of two months of receipt of this order. After the said period the applicant would be at liberty to repeat the bail application on whatsoever grounds available to him. The application stands disposed of. N.H.Q./A‑520/K Order accordingly.