2021 PLP 102 (YLR)

ALI BAIG, J.

Petitioner/accused namely Zahid Ullah son of Saman has filed the instant bail petition under Section 497, Cr.P.C. for grant of post arrest bail in case FIR No. 26/2019 dated 18-10-2019, registered under Sections 337-F(5), 337-F(3), 324, 148 and 149, P.P.C., at Police Station Jal Thak, Tehsil Chilas, District Diamer.

2. Case of prosecution as unfolded in the FIR is that on 17-10-2019, at 15:30 hours, the petitioner/accused and complainant party were gathered at mouza Dayong jungle Thak in connection with develop consensus regarding Timber of Dayong Forest. In the meanwhile, some altercation between the parties took place. Resultantly, the present petitioner and his co-accused opened fires on one Abdul Malik and Mayo Khan with fire arms and the above named persons sustained injuries. The occurrence was witnessed by the complainant and other eye-witnesses.

3. It may be mentioned here that earlier the petitioner had filed pre-arrest bail petition in the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge Diamer which was dismissed by the learned trial court vide order dated 14-12-2019. Later on, the petitioner had filed post-arrest bail petition under Section 497, Cr.P.C. in the court of the learned Vacations Sessions Judge Gilgit which was also dismissed by the learned Vacations Sessions Judge Gilgit, hence this petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner/accused is innocent and the complainant party has falsely implicated him in this case. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the present complainant party has murdered three persons of the petitioner's party and a case FIR No.24/2019 dated 17-10-2019 has been lodged against the present complainant party as such it is a case of cross version and case of the petitioner requires further inquiry. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the co-accused of the present petitioner namely Mehboobullah, Munir Shah, Saman, Mashroof, Nasirullah and Dilshad have been admitted to pre-arrest bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Diamer. Thus, rule of consistency applies to the case of the present petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the victim namely Abdul Malik has allegedly received injury on his leg/foot which is not vital part of body of victim, hence the petitioner is entitled for concession of bail.

5. Conversely, the learned Deputy Advocate General has vehemently opposed this bail petition by contending that the petitioner is directly charged in the FIR. The learned Deputy Advocate General has further argued that offence under Section 324, P.P.C. falls within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. The learned Deputy Advocate General has further contended that weapon of offence has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner/ accused, thus he is not entitled for concession of bail.

6. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and with their able assistance perused the record.

7. From perusal of contents of FIR, it reveals that both the accused and complainant parties were gathered at the place of occurrence to develop consensus regarding timber/ firewood of their forest. During jirgah, an altercation between the parties took place ad resultantly fight was taken place and three persons belonging to the present petitioner's party were murdered in the said occurrence. Accordingly, two FIRs, bearing FIR No.24/2019 and FIR No.26/2019, were registered against each other by the parties. Moreover, the petitioner had allegedly opened fires on one Abdul Malik and he has sustained injuries, but the learned Deputy Advocate General has not produced any Medico Legal Report and injury sheet regarding injury of victim namely Abdul Malik which creates serious doubt regarding involvement of the petitioner in this case and benefit of doubt can be extended to the petitioner /accused even at bail stage. Moreover, there is 24 hours unexplained delay in lodging FIR and nominated co-accused of the present petitioner/accused have been granted pre-arrest bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Diamer, hence rule of consistency applies to the case of the petitioner/accused and petitioner is entitled for concession of bail.

8. Epitome of above discussion is that this petition is allowed. Consequently, the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.500,000/- (Rupees Five Lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

9. Before parting with this order, it is observed that concerned Superintendents of Police (S.Ps.) of districts of Gilgit-Baltistan do not provide complete police record/file to the learned Deputy Advocate General before arguments on the bail petitions before this Court due to which the learned Deputy Advocate General does not properly assist the court for want of record. Hence, the Inspector General Police Gilgit-Baltistan is directed to issue necessary instructions to all the Superintendents of Police (S.Ps.) of districts of Gilgit-Baltistan to provide complete record of investigation to the Deputy Advocate General well before hearing arguments on bail petitions so that he may assist the court properly. Copy of this order be sent to the learned Inspector General Police Gilgit-Baltistan for compliance. File. ADN/20/GB Bail allowed.