1988 P Cr (PLP)

Yaseem Qazi for- the State. Hadayatullah for the Complainant. Inayat petitioner has moved this petition for bail in a case registered against him and others under sections 148, 302 and 324/149, P. P. C.

2. In the occurrence which took place on 10-11-1986 at noon time Murtaza and Amir Ali deceased were murdered while Manzoor and Shameer P.Ws. suffered injuries. The part attributed to Inayat petitioner was that he gave a Barchhi blow on the left arm of Manzoor P. W.

3. The petitioner and his co-accused moved an application for bail in the Sessions Court which came up for hearing before the learned Additional Sessions Judge who allowed bail to Ayub, Akbar and Ahmad accused. The prayer of the petitioner was, however, declined on the ground that he gave a specific spear injury on the person of Manzoor P.W. Thereafter, the petitioner moved Criminal Miscellaneous 1285-B of 1987 in this Court which came up for hearing on 24-4-1987. The learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the trial would commence on 27-6-1987 and in support of the submission, he filed a certified copy of the order-sheet of the trial Court. As soon as he apprised the Court of this fact, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition and the same was disposed of accordingly.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the case could not proceed as the complainant and his witnesses deliberately failed to appear in Court on three consecutive dates of hearing. He further submits that the injury attributed to the petitioner was simple in nature and his case is at par with that of Ayub and Akbar who were admitted to bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Learned State counsel does not oppose the prayer for bail. He states that the report of the learned Additional Sessions Judge clearly shows that P.Ws. failed to attend the Court.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant on the other hand submits that three witnesses are in jail and the remaining witnesses will be produced on the next date of hearing. He, however, concedes that no injury to the deceased has been attributed to the petitioner.

6. The report received from the Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura, shows that 27th of June, 1987 was fixed for prosecution evidence but none of the witnesses appeared and the case was adjburnea to 22-7-1987, when again it was adjourned for the same reason to 19-9-1979. On this date the position remained the same and now the case has been fixed for 21-11-1987. Since the prosecution witnesses are not appearing and only a simple injury to a P.W. has bees, attributed to the petitioner, I feel that a case for his enlargement on bail is made out. I, therefore, admit him to bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C., Sheikhupura. S.A./I-64/L Bail granted.