2000 PLP 901 (YLR)

Through the instant petition .the petitioner has sought bail after arrest in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.78 of 1999, under sections 324, 334, 336, 109 and 148/149, P.P.C., at Police Station Rukkan Pur, District Rahimyar Khan.

2. As per F.I.R., the allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith eight persons forcibly dragged Ghulam Muhammad, the complainant, to the premises of a nearby School and, thereafter, facilitated the chopping of nose and both lips of the complainant by Muhammad Ayub, the principal accused.

3. Earlier the petition for bail after arrest moved by the petitioner, wag dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rehimyar Khan vide his order, dated 26-0 1999, hence this petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that no motive is attributed to the petitioner; even no injury to the complainant was caused by the petitioner, though the petitioner was shown armed with a pistol but the same was not even used; no recovery whatsoever has been effected from the petitioner despite his being on physical remand with the police; he is behind the bars for the last more than five months and no challan incomplete or complete has been submitted in the Trial Court; six persons named in the F.I.R., has already been declared innocent by the police; thus, it is a case of further inquiry within the ambit of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.

5. In support of the above submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon 1996 SCMR 1654 (Muhammad Sadiq and another v. The State), 1996 SCMR 1693 (Abdul Aziz v. The State), KLR 1994 Criminal Cases 235 (Muhammad Asghar v. The State), PLD 1997 Peshawar 54 (Libab Khan v. The State and KLR 1994 Criminal Cases 76 (Qurban Shah v. The State).

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State could not successfully controvert the above position, however, he argued that the alleged offences fall within the propitiatory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. 5. 1 have given due consideration to the valuable arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, perused the record and gone through the judgments cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner do have weight and the same are also supported by the judgments referred to above.

6. Resultantly, I am inclined to allow this petition and admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. two lacs (Rs. 2,00,000) with two sureties each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C./Duty Magistrate Rahimyar Khan. The instant petition stands disposed of accordingly. N. H. Q./A-171/L Bail granted.