1998 PLP 1215 (MLD)

Raja Muhammad Ayub Kiani for the State. This petition was forwarded to this Bench vide order dated 10-10-1997 passed by My Lord the Chief Justice, Lahore High Court, Lahore, on Criminal Miscellaneous No.1670-M of 1997, as the bail petition of the co-accused was decided by me.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that according to the F.I.R. Muhammad Abbas while armed with 12 bore gun alongwith ten others variously armed attacked at the complainant side. The fire made by Muhammad Abbas had hit the left side of the chest of Zubair an injured P.W. However, the injury was kept under observation and. still the result has not been obtained by the Investigating Officer as the investigation was changing from one officer to other. However, no recovery of weapon of offence was effected from the aforesaid petitioner. Further contended that Abdul Ghafoor petitioner was not initially named in the F.I.R. but was subsequently involved in the case through the supplementary statement made on the following day of the registration of F.I.R. It was contended that he while armed with a gun made ineffective firing.

3. It is alleged that in fact the complainant side was the aggressor as they had assaulted the petitioner namely Muhammad Abbas, and thereafter, there was exchange of fires from both the sides, as would be clear from the police investigation. There were fire-arm injuries on the person of one Yaseen from the complainant side but the Investigating Officer came to conclusion that those were self-suffered and as such the defence version was discarded. However, a criminal complaint is filed by Muhammad Mansha, father of petitioner No. 1, which is sub judice before the Ilaqa Magistrate in which it has been alleged that the complainant side was the aggressor. The injuries on the person of aforesaid Yaseen were allegedly suppressed in the F.I.R. As such, it is contended that it is a case of counter-version; that the police has not yet submitted the Challan as required by the provisions contained in section 173, Cr.P.C. nor any explanation is given except that the matter is still under investigation and that the Investigating Officers were changing from time to time.

4. I have gone through the police record and find that the last diary in the case was recorded' on 15-9-11997 by the Investigating Officer and thereafter, no step has been taken nor any conclusion has yet been drawn.

5. In view of the foregoing situation and particularly when Abdul Ghafoor petitioner was not named in the F.I.R. and he was assigned the role of ineffective firing through a supplementary statement and that the investigation has not yet been completed, it appears to be a case of further inquiry particularly when there are two versions about the same occurrence which had taken place due to brawl between one Arif from the complainant side and Muhammad Abbas petitioner leading to a tussle between the Meo and Jaat brotherhood.

6. In view of the above circumstances, the petition is allowed and both, the petitioners are admitted to bail in the sum of Rs. 20,000 each with a surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. The petitioners are, however, directed to join the investigation as and when required j by the Investigating Officer in writing. H.B.T./M-536/L ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.