1996 PLP 1319 (MLD)

Raja Khalid Ismail Abbasi for Petitioner. S.A. Mahmood Khan Saddozai for Respondents Nos. l to

5. Qazi Ahmad Naeem Qureshi for the State This is a petition for cancellation of bail granted to respondents Nos.l to 5 by the learned Sessions Judge, Attock, vide his order‑dated 26‑9‑1994.

2. A case F.I.R. No. 158, dated 5‑7‑1994 was registered under section 302/148/149, P.P.C. at Police Station Fateh Jang, District Attock. According to the contents of the F.I.R. on 1‑7‑1994, there was a circumcision function of Atiq‑ur‑Rehman son of Faqir, resident of Dhoke Kumharan, where number of men and women were present. In that gathering, a photograph was taken by Zahoor son of Muhammad Sabir accused, resident of the same village, which was objected to by the complainant and his brother Jahangir and Muhammad Afzal son of Aurangzeb who made complaint to Zahoor. On 4‑7‑1994, at 4‑00 p.m. on the above dispute, an altercation took place between Khalid accused and Muhammad Afzal near a school, but the matter was patched up through the intervention of Mumtaz P.W. However, Khalid and Zahoor felt it ill. On the fateful day, at 6‑00 p.m. when the complainant alongwith Liaquat. Mumtaz. Jahangir and Muhammad Afzal was going on a tractor being driven by Liaquat P.W. towards their land for cultivating Jawar crop in a field and the moment they reached near the well, Sajid armed with .12 bore pistol, Kala Khan armed with .12 bore gun whereas Abdul Majeed armed with a Danda and Khalid armed with a hatchet immediately came in their way and stopped the tractor. They hurled abuses and on this both the parties started fighting and gave Danda and fist blows to each other. Meanwhile, Kala Khan accused fired at Muhammad 12 bore gun which hit on his chest. Thereafter, Sajid accused fired at Jahangir with his 12 bore pistol which hit on the front of his chest and stomach. As a result of the firing, both Jahangir and Muhammad Afzal were seriously injured and after a short while, they expired at the spot. The incident was seen by the P.Ws.

3. The respondents‑accused were granted bail in this case by the learned Sessions Judge, Attock, vide his order, dated 26‑9‑1994. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for cancellation of bail granted to them and mainly relied upon the observation made by this Court in Mumtaz Ali Khan v'. The State Criminal Miscellaneous No.154/B of 1995 wherein in the last para. it is mentioned that "this active concealment persuades me in these circumstances that the other party is aggressor". Actually, in the said case, it was alleged that the accused party had also reported the matter to the police wherein they concealed the factum of murder of two persons hence the aforesaid remarks were given. But the fact ren6ins that Muhammad Afzal and Jahangir were committed to murder. The present respondents/accused were though armed with fire‑arms weapons, but it is not alleged that they caused any injury to the deceased. The person to whom fire‑shot injuries have been attributed in causing the death of aforesaid two deceased, are not on bail. In the circumstances when no specific allegation of causing any injury has been levelled against the present respondent/accused, they were entitled to bail and the learned Sessions Judge, Attock, has rightly released them on bail.

4. In view of the above, I find no substance in the petition for cancellation of bail. Hence the same stands dismissed. N.H.Q./M‑41/L Petition dismissed.