1973 P Cr (PLP)

Hanif Qaiser for Petitioner. Kh. Muhammad Afzal for the State. This is sin application by Saklu Muhammad son of Pehlwan Khan for the grant of bail before arrest, under section 498, Cr. P. C He is accused of offences under sections 148 and 302/307/149, P, P. C. alongwith seven others. He applied for bail before arrest before the learned Sessions Judge, Jhelum on the ground of old age and ill-health but the same was rejected by the sessions Judge vide his order dated 14-11-1972. Hence the present application.

2. In support of his application he produced a certificate from the Medical Superintendent, District, Headquarters Hospital, Jhelum, according to which, the petitioner s heart was enlarged. I, ordered him to be medically examined by the Assistants Professor Cardiology, Mayo Hospital, Lahore, who reported later alia, that the petitioner's heart was normal. The contention that he should be granted bail on medical ground is therefore not available to him. The learned counsel contended next that, admittedly, there was enmity between the accused party and the complainant party and that the latter had involved as many members of the petitioner's family, as possible, due to the said enmity:, He pointed out that according to the allegations .in the F. I. R. petitioner's son and grand-sons as well as his other relatives have been named as assailants and they (the complainant party), did not spare Sakhi Muhammad petitioner, who is about 70 years of age. He contended that when younger persons, like the son and grand-sons, are said have taken part in, the attack, there was no earthly reason for this old and doddering man of 70 years to take part in the attack and that this goes to show that he had been falsely involved. He pointed out further that while specific acts or injuries have been attributed to other accused persons, no specific injury has been attributed to Sakhi Muhammad petitioner. He is said to have been armed with a stick and the allegation against him in the F. I. R. is vague and general terms which read as follows:

Roshan Khan per Sakhi Muhammad Nay Hamla ker dia

3. The learned State Counsel opposed the application on the -ground that the name of the petitioner is mentioned in the F. I. R. and he is said to have done an overt act inasmuch as he assaulted Roshan P. W.

4. The petitioner is present in Court and I notice that, he is indeed a very old man and his age could be anywhere between 68 to 70 years. Although according to the medical report he does not suffer from any ailment of the heart and has not been found to be clinically ill, yet we all know that old age itself brings infirmity and senility with it. I have carefully considered the above-mentioned contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. I do not want to discuss them and express any view about their being forceful or otherwise, because that may be considered an expression of opinion with regard to the merits of the case. I therefore, think it sufficient, at the present stage, to observe that there appear to be reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of an offence punishable with death or transportation for life. Consequently the bail already granted to him is confirmed. Bail confirmed.