2020 PLP 679 (MLD)

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1 of 2019 SARDAR MUHAMMAD SARFRAZ DOGAR, J.

This petition under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. for placing copies of documents mentioned in paragraph No.2 is allowed subject to all just and legal exceptions. Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2 of 2019 Sought for dispensation is allowed subject to all just and legal exceptions. Main case Through this petition, Muhammad Jafar, the petitioner, seeks post-arrest bail in case FIR No.371/2019, dated 09.5.2019, offences under sections 324, 34, 337-D, P.P.C., registered with the Police Station Dijkot, District Faisalabad.

2. The allegation against the petitioner as per prosecution case described in the contents of FIR, lodged on the complaint of Muhammad Rafique/complainant, is that, he inflicted a churee blow in the left side of belly of Ghulam Haidar.

3. Arguments heard, record perused.

4. Perusal of the record reveals that the petitioner is nominated in the FIR with a specific role of causing a churee blow in the belly of Ghulam Haider, which extended in body cavity attracting the offence under section 337-D, P.P.C. The main thrust of arguments, advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the provisions of section 337-D, P.P.C. are not made out.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant has placed on record copies of record relating to the treatment of the injured Ghulam Haider reflecting that he was referred to Gulab Devi Chest Hospital, Lahore and as per his ultrasound report an empyema is seen in his left lung. Section 337-C provides that whoever causes Jurh in which the injury extends to the body cavity of the trunk is said to cause Jaifah. The word 'body cavity' means a body part under which vital organs are located and if an injury penetrates into the body cavity and then enters that part of the body wherein vital organs are located, only then that can be treated as Jaifah and punishment can be awarded accordingly. In the case under discussion, the churee blow inflicted by the petitioner not only entered in the body cavity but also effected the left lung, which is a vital part of body. In the given state of affairs, prima facie the offence under section 337-D, P.P.C. fully attracts to the instant case and the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard is misconceived.

6. It is further argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is unexplained delay of three days in reporting the matter to the Police, therefore, chances of petitioner's false implication cannot be ruled out. The MLC of Ghulam Haider evinces that he was removed to the hospital on the same day of the occurrence in the company of Faryad constable, meaning thereby, the matter was promptly reported to the police, as such, the delay is not attributed to the complainant.

7. During the investigation, the churee has been recovered on the pointation of the petitioner. He has been found guilty during the course of investigation. There is no conflict in the ocular, medical and recovery. Prima facie, sufficient incriminating material is available on the record, which connects the petitioner with the commission of the alleged offence, therefore, I feel no hesitation to hold that the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of post-arrest bail.

8. For the above reasons, instant petition is dismissed. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature, and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition. SA/M-193/L Bail refused.