Nadeem alias Chocho son of Shaukat Ali, has sought his post-arrest bail in a case FIR No, 36/2001 registered at Police Station Lohari Gate, Multan, under Sections 337-L(ii), 337-F(ii), 337-A(i1) and 34 PPC, on 8.3.2001.
2. The precise allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith one Muhammad Naeem alias Papu injured Nadeem son of Niaz Muhammad PW. According to the FIR, the present petitioner gave two dagger blows which landed on the right and left hands of Nadeem son of Niaz Muhammad injured PW.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the injuries attributed to the petitioner are simple in nature and the offences do not attribute the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. He relies upon the . cases of Muhammad Amir vs. The State (1973 P.Crl. L.J. 205) and Tariq Bashir and five others vs. The State (PLD 1995 SC 34). He further 'submits that the petitioner was arrested on 23.3.2001 and the investigation qua him has been completed.
4. The learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is nominated in the FIR and as the dagger has been recovered from him, therefore, he does not deserve the concession of bail in the circumstances of the case.
However, he is not in a position to controvert the fact that none of the offences attracts the mischief of the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. Admittedly, the petitioner is not a previous convict. I see eye to eye with the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and B therefore, grant bail to the petitioner subject to his tendering bail bonds in the sum of Rs, Fifty Thousand with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial