1999 P Cr (PLP)

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), 5.302/324/148/149

Bail, -grant Accused was attributed injury only to a prosecution witness

Medical evidence revealed that the said witness sustained only one fire-arm injury whereas according to F.I.R. he had sustained two fire-arm injuries, one at the hands of the accused and the other at the hands of co-accused

Fact as to who had caused the fire-arm injury to the prosecution witness could only be determined at the trial by the Trial Court after recording evidence

Case was one of cross-version and everybody might ultimately be held responsible for his own act

Large number of persons had been involved in the case

Case against accused in circumstances, needed further inquiry

Accused was behind the bars for the last about one and half years

Bail was allowed to accused accordingly. Ch. Saghir Ahmed for Petitioner. Noor Muhammad Qasid Kalyar for the State. The petitioner, Abdul Sattar, is seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 146 of 1996, dated 11-7-1996, registered at Police Station Saddar Burewala. District Vehari, for the offences under section 302/324/148/149, P.P.C. at the instance of complainant Shamshir-ul-Haq for -an occurrence in which Nazir Ahmed, father of the complainant got killed due to single fire-arm injury on left knee, attributed to co-accused Sajwara, and Farooq, P.W. to injured due to fire arm injuries attributed to co-accused Din Muhammad and the petitioner.

2. The petitioner was arrested in October, 1996, and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, has dismissed the application for the grant of bail on 28-2-1998. The challan has been submitted against thirteen persons including the petitioner.

3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner although allegedly armed with a rifle did not cause any injury and the so-called injury attributed to the petitioner on the person of Farooq Ahmed, P.W. is not supported with the medical evidence because according to the F.I.R., Farooq Ahmed, P.W. sustained two fire-arm injuries whereas Medical Report shows that he has only one injury on the left leg and it is yet to be determined as to whether the same was caused by the petitioner or by co-accused Din Muhammad and even otherwise the same is on the non-vital part of Farooq Ahmad who was not seriously injured because according to the F.I.R. version he also went alongwith the complainant to the Police Station to lodge the F.I.R. it is further submitted that three of the accused namely, Sajwara, Ali Sher and Mst. Zainab also received fire-arm injuries in the occurrence which have not been explained in the F. I. R. and cross-case F. I. R. No. 147 of 1996 has also been registered and the accused in the cross-case are on "bail. The bail is also being sought on the ground that the co-accused Muhammad Anwar, Ali Sher and Mashooq Ali, having the similar role, have been granted bail by this Court on 25-2-1997 and 8-5-1997 respectively, in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1882/B of 1996 and Criminal Miscellaneous No.599/B of 1997. Learned counsel for the State while opposing the petition has submitted that the petitioner is specifically nominated in the F.I.R. with a specific role and his case is distinguishable than of those who have been granted bail by this Court as injury to Farooq Ahmed, P.W is attributed to the petitioner alongwith the co-accused Din Muhammad.

4. No doubt the petitioner's case is not the same as of those who have been granted bail by this Court because the petitioner is attributed injury to Farooq Ahmed, P.W. However, medical evidence shows that Farooq Ahmed k sustained only one fire-arm injury, whereas, according to the F.I.R. version he sustained two fire-arm injuries, one attributed to-the petitioner and the other attributed to the co-accused Din Muhammad and this fact can only be determined at the trial stage by the trial Court after recording evidence as to who caused fire-arm injury to Farooq Ahmed, P.W. Furthermore, it is a cross-version case and Sajwara, the accused in the present F.I.R. and the injured P.W. in the cross F.I.R. No.147 has since died and all these facts show that everybody under the circumstances may ultimately be held to be responsible for his own acts. The petitioner is behind the bars for the last about one and a half years. All the circumstances, coupled with the fact that a large number of persons have been shown as accused, I am of the view that the case to the extent of the petitioner is that of further enquiry. The application is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is granted bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Copy Dasti. N.H.Q./A-362/L Bail allowed.