1995 P Cr (PLP)

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.337-A(v), (ii) & (i)/452/148/149-- Bail, grant of

Offences charged against accused did not fall within the prohibitory clause and in suc1i cases denial of bail was an exception

Injuries were mostly on non-vital parts of the bodies of the victims

Injury caused to one victim although was on her head, but the weapon used was not very lethal

Accused, if convicted, were not likely to be sentenced to more than two or three years' imprisonment

Accused were ;cal brothers and the prosecution was yet to explain the delay of three days in lodging the F.I.R.

Prima facie reasonable grounds did not exist to believe that the accused were guilty of offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment of more than ten years

Accused were released on bail in a: circumstances. Altaf Ibrahim Oureshi for Petitioners. Sh. Gul Muhammad for the State Sh. Muhammad Faheem for the Complainant The two petitioners seek bail in case F.I.R. No.175/94, dated 17-6-199-1 registered at Policc Station Saddar, Vchari, under sections 337-A-5, 337-A (ii), 337-A(i), 452/148 and 149, P.P.C., against five persons including the two petitioners. The allegations levelled by Muhammad Afsar, complainant, are that about refusal to allow canal water, a fight ensued in which the two petitioners are alleged to have caused injury with their respective weapons. Umar Hayat, petitioner, armed with a piece of heavy wood, is claimed to have injured Mst. Zohra Bibi by giving a blow on her head which caused fracture in the skull. Muhammad Bakhsh, petitioner, is claimed to be armed with hatchet a4d is said to have used the blunt side of the same causing injury to Talib Hussain on the left little finger and to Mst. Kalsoom on her left wrist which again is said to have suffered a fracture. In support of the bail plea, the learned counsel has contended that there is a delay of three days in lodging the F.I.R., which is not explained, all the accused are real brothers and that the injuries are on non-vital parts. It is also stated that the petitioners are in jail for the last 4/5 months. Umar Hayat, petitioner, was initially released on bail by Magistrate on 14-7-1994, but the bail was cancelled by the Additional Sessions Judge on 1-8-1994. On the same date and learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the bail plea of Muhammad Bakhsh, petitioner. The learned State, counsel as well as the complainant's counsel have both resisted the grant of bail.

2. The offences alleged do not make out a case, which falls within the prohibited degree and in such cases the denial of bail is an exception. The injuries are mostly on non-vital parts. The injury caused by Umar Hayat to Mst. Zohra even though on head, but the weapon used is not very lethal. If convicted, the petitioners are not likely to be sentenced to more than 2/3 years of imprisonment. It is also relevant that all the accused are real brothers. The prosecution will also be required to explain the delay of three days in lodging the F.I.R. Prima facie for the reasons stated above, there do not seem to be reasonable ground to hold that the petitioners are guilty of the offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or to imprisonment of more than ten years. In the circumstances, this petition is allowed. The two petitioners shall be released on bail provided they furnish bond in the sum of Rs.25,000 with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Vehari. N.H.Q./U-37/L Bail granted