2008 PLP 1851 (YLR)

MUNIB AHMAD KHAN, J.

By this application, the bail is sought by applicant Mir Muhammad @ Miroo who is involved in Crime No.24/2005 of P.S Dhamrah registered for an offence under sections, 324, 109, 34, 509, P.P.C. The allegation against the present applicant Mir Muhammad alias Miroo is that on 23-5-2005 the complainant along with his father were returning back from their land and at 1915 hours when they were passing through canal, the applicant duly armed with repeater along with co-accused Saifullah armed with gun, intercepted the complainant party and applicant fired from his repeater which hit Abdul Majeed father of complainant on his right arm and the co-accused Saifullah also fired from his gun which hit Abdul Majeed on the thigh of right leg. It is further alleged that later applicant again fired from his repeater which hit father of complainant on his abdomen. The bail pleas advanced on behalf of applicant before trial Court was rejected vide judgment order dated 15-9-2007, giving rise to the present bail application. Learned counsel has urged that there is delay of more than 12 hours in lodging the F.I.R. and the accused has been accused of causing injuries on the right arm and abdomen of the injured Abdul Majeed with repeater but the medical report in respect to the injuries does not tally with the injuries which are normally caused by a repeater as the repeater causes injuries at several points of body because of several pallets in one cartridge. He further submits that co-accused Saifullah has been attributed active role of firing but the version of complainant has not been relied upon by the police and co-accused Saifullah has been placed in column No.2. He submits that the applicant has been involved falsely and that for last 2 years he has been behind the bars while even charge has not been framed. Learned State Counsel has not denied the proceedings stage and non-framing of the charge nor he has denied that co-accused Saifullah has been placed in column No.2, but he submits that certain injuries have been attributed to the applicant, hence he opposed bail. After hearing learned counsel, I have observed by the version of the learned counsel for the applicant in respect to the description of the injuries vis-a-vis the arms used needs to be tallied through evidence as apparently a repeater has been used and after two shots deceased fell down while third injury has been attributed on his abdomen therefore, it is to be seen as to from which distance the applicant has fired with his repeater and what was perversity of injuries. It has further been observed that only two shells of .12 bore gun have been recovered while there were allegedly 3 shots as per version of the applicant. It has further been noted that co-accused Saifullah has been placed in column No.2 which clearly shows that even the version of the complainant has not been relied upon by the Investigating Officer. In such a situation, there needs some further scrutiny, hence keeping in view the additional factor that the applicant is behind bars for the last 2 years, some concession be given to him therefore, he is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.3.00,000 and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. H.B.T./M-43/K Bail granted.