2007 PLP 3139 (YLR)

IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.

Through this application under section 497 Cr.P..C, Waqas Shahid the petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in a case F.I.R No.156-2006, dated 10-8-2006 registered under sections 302, 324, 337/A(i), (ii), (vi) L(1) & L(2), 148/149, P.P.C. of Police Station Nawan Lahore, District T.T. Singh on the application of Fayyaz Ahmad, the complainant.

2. The brief facts of the case as alleged in the F.I.R are that on 5-8-2006 at about 7-30 p.m the complainant along with his son Muhammad Usman and other persons of the locality had participated in a Putichayat held at Chak No.278/J.B. in respect of a theft committed in the Poultry farm of the complainant; that during the conversation hot words were exchanged and the accused persons of this case started hurling abuses to Muhammad Usman (son of the complainant), who forbade them from doing so. .Thereupon Waqas (petitioner) gave slaps to Usman. In the meanwhile Waqar co-accused inflicted dandy blows to Usman first hitting over his right ear and head and second on rear side of his head, who in an unconscious condition fell on the ground. Then Shahid Hussain (co-accused) raised a lalkara not to spare the complainant party and Adeel Masih acid Salamat Masih co-accused caught hold of Basharat (nephew of the complainant) and gave beating to him. In the meantime, Ahad Hussain (co-accused) gave two blows with datar hitting on the head of Basharat (victim), who fell on the ground while smeared with blood and then Adeel Masih and Salamat Masih co-accused gave fist blows to Basharat (victim). On seeing this Rehan Ashraf and Saeed Ahmad P.Ws along with other attendants of the Punchayat interfered and rescued the complainant party from the above said accused-persons. Then both .injured were escorted to the Rural Health .Centre, Nawan Lahore for their treatment, but due to non-availability of first aid there, they were referred to the Allied Hospital Faisalabad by the concerned Doctor.

3. The motive behind the occurrence was alleged that a few days prior to the occurrence, a theft had been committed at the Poultry farm of the complainant and before the Punchayat the accused persons admitted to have stolen some articles and on making demand for the return of remaining articles by Muhammad Usman and Basharat victims, they were caused injured by the accused-persons.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner was not armed with weapon during the incident; that there was delay of 5-days in lodging the F.I.R; that allegation against the petitioner was that he gave slaps to the deceased, but no abrasion was found. on the dead body of the deceased; that the case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from the case of Shahid Hussain (co-accused), who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 16-01-2007 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 10642-B of 2006; that the incident had taken place at the spur of moment; that co-accused were attributed specific injuries resulting in death of the deceased and involvement of the petitioner in the present case is due to mala fide intention of the complainant; that the case falls within the preview of further inquiry and he may be allowed bail.

5. The learned Addl: Prosecutor General has opposed this bail petition on the ground that the petitioner had slapped the deceased and offence falls within ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.

6. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with due care and caution.

7. Admittedly, the petitioner was not armed with any weapon and there was delay of 5-days in lodging the F.I.R without any explanation. Nothing was recovered from the petitioner. Whether the petitioner had shared the common intention with co-accused during the incident or participated therein is a question of further inquiry and his case is also covered by section 497(2),. Cr.P.C. The occurrence seems to have taken place at the spur of moment without premeditation. The bail cannot be withheld merely as a punishment and the petitioner cannot be detained in jail for .indefinite period due to the role ascribed to him. For the foregoing reasons, the instant bail application is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 with -two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. N.H.Q/W-3/L Bail allowed.