1991 P Cr (PLP)

S. 497(2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/307/147/148/149

West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13-D

Bail, grant of

Each accused appeared to be liable for his individual act

Accused were neither alleged to have. used `Lathis' with which they were armed nor were alleged to have participated in the fight

Case against accused, therefore., called for further inquiry

Accused were admitted to bail in circumstances. Mazhar Ali Siddiqui for Applicants Muhammad Siddiq Kharal, Addl. A.-G. for the State. The present applicants have been sent up to stand trial under sections 302, 307, 147, 148 and 149, P.P.C. and 13-D Arms Ordinance in the case registered with Garhiyasin Police Station as Crime No.51/90. As per the prosecution case it is an admitted position that there is enmit4 between the parties on account of excavation of a water Nali for the purpose of irrigation of their lands. It is further alleged that on the day of occurrence the complainant along with deceased Noor Muhammad and injured P.W. Qamardin were standing near the road in the village when the present applicants along with co-accused Hakim and Aligoher came there, of whom the present applicants Kadirdad and Oamardin are alleged to be armed with guns while the others are said to be having Lathis in their hands. The parties seeing each other exchanged harsh words and applicant Oamardin is alleged to have fired at deceased Noor Muhammad while applicant Kadirdad fired at injured P.W. Qamardin. According to the complainant he raised cries on which the witnesses were attracted and the accused party ran away. A bail application was moved on behalf of the present applicants only before the trial Court which was rejected and, therefore, this bail application. I have heard Mr. Mazhar Ali Siddiqui, the learned counsel for the y applicants. He does not press the bail application for applicants Kadirdad and Qamardin at this stage and their bail application is accordingly dismissed as not pressed. The learned counsel, however, presses the bail application for the remaining applicants, namely, Mazar, Faiz Muhammad and Laiq. He has submitted that the said three applicants are alleged to have been armed with Lathis only but there is no allegation against them that they had participated in the fight or used their Lathis. The learned counsel has further pointed out that the present accused party had also lodged F.I.R. of the said incident on the very day within half an hour of the lodging of the F.1.R. by the present complainant wherein 14 accused persons have been named and that in the same fight two persons from the present accused party, namely, Mir Muhammad and Amanullah had also died having sustained fire-arm injuries. The learned counsel has further submitted that bail applications were moved before this Court in the said counter-case being Criminal Bail Applications Nos.664 and 665 of 1990 and out of 14 accused the bail was granted to those persons against whom no overt act was attributed. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel. It is an admitted position that enmity exists between the parties and also that the fight had taken place in the open lane in the village when according to the counter-F.I.R. the present accused party were returning from their lands and the complainant party were standing and that on seeing each other the fight took place on spur of moment. In these circumstances it is yet to be determined as to whether all the accused named in the F.1.R. are vicariously liable. The facts as they stand at this stage would show that each person would be liable for the individual act committed by him. The allegation against the three applicants, namely, Mazar, Faiz Muhaminad and Laik is only that they were carrying Lathis but it is not alleged that they used the said Lathis or participated in the fight. In these circumstances I am of the view that the case of the present applicants calls for further enquiry. Accordingly these three applicants are admitted to bail and shall be released subject to their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. one lac each with one surety and P.R. bond each of like amount to be furnished to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.H.Q./Q-48/K Bail allowed.