1997 P Cr (PLP)

The petitioner through the instant petition has sought post-arrest bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.73/96, dated 14-2-1996 under section 334, P.P.C. at Police Station Rajana, Toba Tek Singh.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner and State were heard at length in respect of the contentions stated herein. It has been taken notice of, as a perusal of F.I.R. in question has established, that the offence, alleged, is under the provisions of section 334, P.P.C. which is as follows:-- "

334. Whoever by doing any act with the intention of thereby causing hurt to any person or with the knowledge that he is likely thereby to cause hurt to any person causes Itlaf-i-Udw of any person, shall in consultation with the authorised Medical Officer, be punished with Qisas, and if the Qisas is not executable keeping in view the principles of equality in accordance with the Injunctions of Islam, the offender shall be liable to Arsh and may also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years as Ta zir. " Whereas 'Itlaf-i-Udw' has been defined in section 333, P.P.C. which is as under:-- "

333. Whoever dismembers, amputates, severs any limb or organ of the body of another person is said to cause Itlaf-i-Udw." It has been further taken notice of that the specific injury attributed to the petitioner is in respect of having broken 8 teeth of the injured P.W. Muhammad Akhtar, though it was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that only two teeth of the said P.W. were allegedly broken and, in this respect, he has placed reliance upon the report of the Dental Surgeon, a photostat copy whereof has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner and is directed to be placed on the record; and that the punishment thereof has been specifically stated in section 337-U(1) as follows:-- 337-U(1) The Arsh for causing Itlaf of a tooth, other than a milk tooth shall be on-twentieth of the Diyat. " Further notice has been taken of the fact that Arsh for causing Itlaf of 20 or more teeth is stated to be equal to the value of Diyat in subsection (2) thereof.

3. Therefore, pursuant to what has been stated above, it is hereby observed that it is yet to be determined at the trial as to under which provision of the sections, stated above, and as to what punishment the accused/petitioner is liable of, even if the case of the prosecution as set forth, is proved; and that therefore, the case of the petitioner is duly covered under the provisions of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. as a case of further inquiry. It has been further taken notice of that there is a delay of two days in the lodging of the F.I.R. in question and that the explanation for the same is the proverbial attempt to patch up the matter, and that the benefit thereof should go to the accused even at the bail stage, without stretching the law in favour of the prosecution of denying the bail as punishment, as laid down in PLD 1972 SC 81 and PLD 1972 SC

277. It is further confirmed on behalf of the State that the petitioner is, neither a previous convict nor a hardened criminal and that he is no longer required by the police.

4. Therefore, pursuant to the above discussion, the petitioner is hereby allowed bail in the sum of Rs.30,000 with two sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court concerned. 5.???????? Copy Dasti on usual charges, N.H.Q./M-145/L???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail allowed