1999 PLP 3435 (MLD)

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S 337-A(ii)/337-F(ii)/337-H/148/149

. Bail, grant of

Two contradictory opinions from two different Police Officers about guilt and innocence of accused and co-accused

Police having not added S. 324, P. P. C., offences alleged in F. I. R against accused did not fall within prohibitory clause of S. 497(1), Cr.P.C.

On filing application by complainant for cancellation of bail granted to accused and co-accused, bail of co-accused was not cancelled whereas bail of accused was cancelled by Trial Court-- Considerations for grant and cancellation of bail were totally different

Case of accused was covered by S. 497(2), Cr. P.C. which required further inquiry into guilt of accused

Accused was allowed bail. Zahid Hussain Khan for Petitioner Hussain Aziz Bhatti, A. A. G. for the State Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a delay of two days in lodging the F. I. R. without any, explanation; that earlier petitioner and his co-accused were granted bail on the ground that all of them were found innocent by the Investigating Officer. Later on, on re-investigation A. S. I. found the petitioner and his co-accused guilty in the instant case. The complainant filed an application for cancellation of bail against the petitioner and his co-accused, the learned Additional Sessions Judge did not accept that application to the extent of co-accused of the petitioner but concealed the bail of the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that law of consistency demands that the case of the petitioner should be treated at par with his co -accused. He further submits that these is a conflict between the findings of two Investigating Officers. which call for further inquiry into the guilt of the petitioner.

2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioners caused hatchet blow, the same has been recovered from the petitioner and the said injury is on the head of injured P. W. So, he is not entitled to the grant of bail.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record.

4. It is not denied by the prosecution that there are two contradictory opinions of two different police officers about the guilt and innocence of the petitioner and his co-accused; that police has not added section 324, P. P. C. in the instant case; that the offences alleged in the F. I. R. against the petitioner does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 (1), Cr.P.C. Moreover, the bail of the co-accused of the petitioner has not been cancelled by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhang. Consideration for grant of bail and for cancellation of bail are totally different. In this view of the matter, case of the petitioner is covered by section 497(2), Cr.P.C. which requires further inquiry into the guilt of the petitioner. Petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs. 50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./K.71-L Bail granted.