1985 P Cr (PLP)

‑‑‑S. 497(5)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 307 & 148/149‑ -Cancellation of bail‑‑Accused persons having been attributed specific parts in F.I.R.‑‑One accused allegedly inflicting an injury on head of complainant which standing corroborated by medical evidence Other accused allegedly firing at and injuring another prosecution witness‑Medical evidence also corroborating such fact‑‑Presence of said accused persons, held, prima facie stood established and bail allowed to them cancelled circumstances. Hasnaat Ahmad Khan for Petitioner. Naveed Shehryar for Respondents Nos. 1 to

6. Surriya Irshad for the State. This is a petition under section 497(5), Cr.P.C. filed by Nazir Ahmad, petitioner for the cancellation of bail of Nasrullah Khan and five others, respondents Nos. 1 to 6 granted by an Additional Sessions Judge of Gujrat on 15‑11‑1984.

2. The prosecution case in brief is that there are about three cross criminal cases between the accused party on one side and the complainant party on the other. On 21‑1‑1984 the complainant party in the present case were to attend Court, in which they were arrayed as accused. When they were proceeding from their village and reached the bus stop they were attacked by the accused party in the present case. Muhammad Akbar, respondent No.2, Nazar Muhammad co‑accused and Zaffar Abbas, co‑accused were armed with guns, Jalal respondent Riasat Ali and Muhammad Yaqub co‑accused were armed with hatchets and Nasrullah Khan, Inayat Hussain, Tariq Ali and Arshad Ali, respondents and Muhammad Sadiq son of Fateh Muhammad, Khadim Hussain, Muhammad Khan and Muhammad Sadiq son of Rehman co‑accused were armed with Sotas. They launched an attack on the complainant party killing Rashid Ahmad, deceased, and inflicting injuries on Nazir Ahmad, complainant, Naseer Ahmad and Rafaqat Hussain P.Ws. According to the F.I.R., Nazar Muhammad and Zaffar Abbas, co‑accused, fired at and injured the deceased with their guns, whereas Riasat Ali and Muhammad Sadiq, co‑accused, inflicted injuries on him with their hatchets and Sots respectively. Nasrullah Khan respondent, is alleged to have inflicted a Sots blow on the head of Nazir Ahmad, complainant. Muhammad Akbar, respondent, is alleged to have fired at and injured Naseer Ahmad P.W. Muhammad Yaqub P.W. is alleged to have inflicted a hatchet injury on Rafaqat Hussain P.W. A general infliction of injuries by all the respondents and the co‑accused with their respective weapons on Rashid Ahmad, deceased, and three witnesses is also referred to in the F.I.R.

3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondents and the State and have also perused the police file. The learned Additional Sessions Judge found that as Khadim Hussain, co‑accused, was held to be innocent by the police and Muhammad Khan and Muhammad Yaqub, co‑accused, were about 70 years old each and suffered from severe cataract and bronchial asthma, their presence at the spot was doubtful. He, therefore, held that the case with regard to the participation of the present six respondents and the said three co‑accused referred to called for further inquiry, I agree with the observation of the learned Additional Sessions Judge that the case of each accused requires careful scrutiny, in view of certain factors submitted by him, but the case of Nasrullah Khan and Muhammad Akbar is distinguishable, as both have been attributed specific parts in the F.I.R. Nasrullah Khan, respondent is alleged to have inflicted an injury on the head of Nazir Ahmad, complainant, which stands corroborated by the medical testimony. Muhammad Akbar, respondent is alleged to have, fired at and injured Naseer Ahmad P.W. The medical testimony also corroborates this fact. Their presence, therefore, prima facie stands established. The case of the other four respondents, who are included in the general infliction of the injuries given by all the accused, is different. Their case would be covered by the principle of further inquiry.

4. For the foregoing reasons, this petition is partly accepted and the bail of Nasrullah Khan and Muhammad Akbar, respondents Nos. 1 and 2 granted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat on 15‑11‑1984 is hereby cancelled. They shall be taken into custody. This petition qua Jalal and others, respondents Nos. 3 to 6, is dismissed. H. A. K. Petition partly accepted.