2012 PLP 1306 (YLR)

SHAHID ANWAR BAJWA, J.

F.I.R No.155 of 2010 was recorded at Police Station, Kandiaro, on 7-10-2009 at 3-15 p.m. for an incident alleged to have taken place 45 minutes earlier. The complainant stated that his brother was standing by side of his house when he was injured by Muhammad Bux party and his brother lodged F.I.R. at Police Station, Kandiaro. Complainant and his other brother Kirir came to know about the incident and while they were going with another relative on a motorcycle on the way they noticed the present applicant armed with a gun along with his two brothers also armed with guns standing. Complainant party was made to stop their motorcycles. Present applicant is alleged to have stated that Ghulam Farooq had gone to lodge F.I.R. and therefore they would not spare the complainant. In the meanwhile another brother of the accused persons came there and upon his instigation it is stated in the F.I.R. that "the accused persons made direct fire on my brother Kirir which hit on his back". Kirir raised cries and fell down and then all the accused persons fled away. Mr. Sardar Akbar F. Ujjan, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is case of admitted enmity. Learned counsel read from the F.I.R. and the postmortem report and stated that in the F.I.R. it is stated that deceased Kirir was hit on his back whereas in the postmortem report it is stated injury was on the front. He submitted that, therefore, it is an unseen incident. Learned counsel next submitted that it is stated in the F.I.R. that three persons fired but there is only one injury and only one empty was recovered from the place of vardat. Learned counsel also referred to the postmortem report and submitted that it is stated that there was blackening around the edges of the entry wound and therefore it indicated that fire was made from very close range but no such statement had been made in the F.I.R. Lastly, learned counsel stated that whereas the mashirnama stated that place of vardat was three furlongs away from house of the applicant F.I.R. stated that it was close to that house. He submitted that all this created doubt and benefit of doubt even at the bail stage must be given to the accused persons. Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Jatoi, learned Deputy Prosecutor-General vehemently opposed grant of this bail application. He submitted that the postmortem report reveals that there were seven circular shaped penetrating and punctured lacerated wounds. He submitted that the gun has been recovered from the present applicant and a direct role is attributed to the present applicant. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel and also gone through the record. In the postmortem report the following injuries are stated:-- (1) Seven circular shaped penetrating and punctured type of lacerated wounds each measuring 0.8 cm in diameter with inverted margins blackening present around each wound (wound of entrance) situated on right side of chest interiorly at its upper 1/3 level (all seven wounds of entries are situated within 05 cm). (2) A lacerated wound measuring 3 cm x 2.5 cm with averted margins situated on the back of chest posteriorly at its upper 1/3 (wound of exit). First contention of the learned counsel was that in the F.I.R. it is stated as injury was on the back whereas in the postmortem report it is stated as a front injury. It may be noticed that F.I.R. was lodged within 45 minutes of the incident and details of injuries, reproduced above, indicates that there was entry wound from the front and exit wound from the back. Therefore, mere fact that F.I.R. stated that there was injury from the back is immaterial in the circumstances because there was in any case an injury, though an exit wound, at the back. Contention of the learned counsel that postmortem report states that there was blackening present around each wound of entry and therefore it must have been fired from a close range and it has not been stated in the F.I.R. is not relevant at this stage because that needs deeper appreciation of evidence which exercise cannot be undertaken at the bail stage. Same is the position of contention of the learned counsel that mashirnama of place of vardat indicates that it was at a distance of three furlongs from house of Muhammad Hassan and the F.I.R. indicated that it was near his house. Again it is a question of deeper appreciation of evidence as to what was the distance from the house of Muhammad Hassan. A perusal of the postmortem report indicates that there are seven circular shaped penetrating and punctured type of lacerated wounds each measuring 0.8 cm in diameter with inverted margins and a single lacerated wound measuring 3 cm x 2.5 cm as exit wound. Contention of the learned counsel that only one empty was recovered from the place of vardat and though three persons are alleged to have fired, therefore, it is a question of further enquiry as to how many fired and as to who fired the fatal shot is not without force. The matter is therefore of further enquiry. Result of the above discussion is that this bail application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be admitted to bail upon his executing a PR bond in the sum of Rs.300,000 (three hundred thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. M.W.A./M-16/K Bail granted.