1985 P Cr (PLP)

A.Q. Halepota for Applicant. A. A. Muhammadally. Asstt. A.‑G. for the State. Applicant Saleem alongwith other accused is facing trial under section 302/34, P.P.C. The case is pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Nawabshah. The prosecution case is that on 15‑5‑1984 complainant Abdul Hakeem heard cries coming from the side of sugarcane cultivation of Sardar Punjabi. He went running towards that direction and saw that Saleem Sahito, Manzoor Kori had pistols while Javed Kori had a gun were following his brother Nisar Ahmed and when they reached near applicant Saleem came in front of Nisar Ahmed and fired from pistol due to which he fell down. On cries Ghulam Hadi and others came and saw the accused. It is alleged that accused tried to run away but complainant party apprehended the applicant, while other accused ran away. Nisar died due to injuries. Thereafter Aftab, brother of applicant Saleem came and asked him as to why he fired a pistol shot at Nisar Ahmed and murdered him by taking side of Manzoor Kori. Aftab then gave Lathi blow to his brother who is now applicant. Mr. A. Q. Halepota, learned counsel appearing for the applicant had contended that story given by the prosecution is improbable and as many as 14 injuries by Lathi and hatchet have been found on the person of applicant Saleem for which there is no explanation from the prosecution side. He has contended that the version given in the F.I.R. that Aftab the brother of applicant gave him Lathi blows is belied by the medical evidence. He states that, as many as two incised wounds have been found on the person of applicant for which there is no explanation by the prosecution. His contention is that it is improbable that accused has received all the 14 injuries at the hands of his own brother. Mr.A.Q Halepota also pointed out that the applicant is a boy of a tender age. Mr. A. A. Muhammadally, Assistant A.‑G. appearing for the State has no objection to the grant of bail. He has stated that brother of applicant Aftab Ahmed's statement has been recorded 15 days after the date of occurrence and it is not known whether he has been cited as a witness in the challan. He has frankly stated that it is yet to be seen as to how applicant sustained so many injuries. No doubt there is specific allegation against the applicant that he first pistol shot at Nisar Ahmed deceased and his co‑accused were also armed with a pistol and gun respectively and he was caught on the spot but the circumstances that as many as 14 injuries by sharp‑edged weapon and blunt weapon found on the person of applicant requires consideration. I have perused the medical certificate of applicant. The Injuries Nos. 1 and 2 caused by sharp‑edged weapon are on the partial region of the applicant when some of the other injuries by blunt weapon have been opined to be grievous and on the vital part. Therefore, at this stage without going into the details, it is admitted fact that he received 14 (fourteen) injuries. These all points could be explained at the time of trial but at this stage I am of the view that this is a case for further enquiry, in the circumstances when the statement of Aftab was not recorded immediately by the police and it is yet to be seen whether this witness is to be examined at the trial or not. I am inclined to consider all these points in favour of the applicant for the purpose of bail only. He is admitted to bail on furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 and bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge, Nawabshah. S. G. D. Bail allowed.