2013 PLP 2697 (YLR)

SHAHID HAMEED DAR, J.

Muhammad Ashraf seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No. 414 of 2010 dated 14-7-2010 under sections 324, 337-F(v), P.P.C, registered at Police Station Langrana, District Chiniot.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he being armed with a .12 bore gun made a fire shot straight at Ahmad Nawaz, the real brother of Anwaar Hussain complainant which landed at his left calf due to which he fell onto the ground. The injured was medically examined vide MLR dated 6-7-2010 which shows two fire arm injuries on the left leg of the injured, one being the entry wound and the other, exit wound. The nature of the injuries was kept under observation which was finally declared by the Radiologist on 2-5-2011 after having X-rayed the injuries of the injured on the said date.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's case calls for further inquiry into his guilt as he did not repeat the fire shot, nor aimed at any vital part of the body of the injured and prosecution itself is perplexed about attraction of offences under section 324, P.P.C. and (sic).

4. Learned Deputy Prosecutor-General Punjab assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the instant petition with the contention that petitioner is specifically nominated in the F.I.R. with role of targeting the left lower leg of the injured with his .12 bore gun and medical evidence supports the said allegation; non-repetition of the fire shot or the locale of injury being non-vital part of the body would not mean that the petitioner did not possess the criminal intent to launch murderous assault on Ahmad Nawaz injured.

5. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I find that the Investigating Officer prepared a cancellation report on 28-9-2010 as parties struck a deal during investigation and complainant side showed intentions not to further prosecute the accused. This cancellation report could not be taken to its logical end as the complainant party appeared before the DSP/SDPO to state that the affidavits on the basis of which cancellation report had been prepared by the Investigating Officer were fake. It was at this stage, when investigation re-started and taken to conclusion by the Investigating Officer, in terms, that the petitioner was guilty of the offence as alleged by the complainant. One thing is important in this case and it relates to the declaration of under observation injuries of the injured which was so done by the Radiologist on 2-5-2011, about 10 months after the medical examination of the injured on 6-7-2010. This delay in declaration of injuries has not been explained vital part of the body of the injured. The petitioner did not repeat the fire shot during the occurrence though empty-handed injured was at his mercy. In this situation, application of section 324, P.P.C. is open to serious exception. The petitioner is no more required for investigation as report under section 173, Cr.P.C. has already been submitted before the learned trial Court on 15-4-2011 so, to keep him languishing in jail would not serve any useful purpose. Prima facie the petitioner's case constitutes need for further inquiry into his guilt as envisaged under section 497(2), Cr.P.C.

6. Therefore, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with one in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. HBT/M-352/L Bail granted.