2005 PLP 1654 (YLR)

Syed Athar Hassan Bokhari for Petitioner. Ch. Pervaiz Aftab for the Complainant. Rao Atif Nawaz for the State. Muhammad Sadiq A.S.I., with Record. Petitioner Rehmat Khan alais Rehman has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 454 of 2003 dated 18-11-2003 registered at the complaint of Waheed Khan son of Wali Dad under sections 324/337-A(ii)/337-D/148/149, P.P.C. at Police Station, Harappa District, Sahiwal.

2. Briefly the allegation against petitioner as per prosecution story is that he along with his co-accused formed an unlawful assembly and in common object made a murderous assault on injured namely Shahbaz and Mansha. He while armed with .12 bore gun fired at injured Shahbaz which hit him on his abdomen and left side of his chest.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner is the result of previous enmity between the parties and he is innocent. That the complainant party was aggressor in this case and they firstly attacked and injured Allah Yar and Qutab co-accused in this case. That the petitioners party filed private complaint wherein the learned trial Court has summoned the accused mentioned in the same and after that case of petitioner has become of tow versions so it will only be determined at the trial after recording evidence as to which party was the aggressor hence petitioner's case is of further inquiry. That co-accused Sardar Khan, Allah Yar, Qutab, Murid Khan, Meeran Khan, Muhammad Khan and Ijaz Khan have been granted bail form the learned trial Court and Iqbal Khan co-accused has been granted bail by this Court. That the petitioner is not previous, convict and is behind the bars for more than nine months. That petitioner is no more required by the local police. Further contended that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner in this case.

4. On the other hand learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail petition and submitted that trial in this case has started. That the accused party was never in possession of agricultural land and complainant party is uptil now in possession and the petitioner' is the main accused in this case. He has placed reliance on "Muhammad Anwar v. The State" 1984 SCMR 412; "Muhammad Hanif v. The State" 1978 SCMR 11 and" Akbar Ali v. The State" 1979 SCMR 129.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record. Admittedly ail the co-accused in this case have been "bailed but except the petitioner who is behind the bars for more than nine months and no more required by the Investigation Agency and no recovery has been effected from the petitioner in this case. The accused party has also filed private complaint wherein the complainant party has been summoned, which makes the case against the petitioner of further inquiry as it is yet to be determined which party was aggressor. The mere commencement of trial is no ground for refusing a bail, if the case of petitioner is otherwise made out of bail and the petitioner's case of further inquiry. Reliance is made on' "Muhammad Ismail v. Muhammad Rafiq and another" PLD 1989 SC

585. For what has' been discussed above petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial 'Court. Petitioner is directed to join the trial and the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously strictly on merits. H.B.T./R-127/L Bail granted.