' Petitioner Zarghun Shah, stands involved alongwith his brothers Waris and Javed in case F.I.R.
No,204 registered at Police Station University Town Peshawar, on 20-3-2003 for offence under sections 302/ 337(i)/34, P.P.C. At the instance of complainant Asif, brother of Hashim deceased. The petitioner has moved instant application for his release on bail on refusal of the same by the Courts below i,e, Judicial Magistrate, Peshawar and Additional Sessions Judge, Peshawar by virtue of their separate orders dated 31-3-2003 and 17-4-2003.
2. The prosecution story in brief is that on the night of occurrence i,e, 20-3-2003 at 7-30 p.m.
Complainant Asif accompanied by his brothers Hashim (deceased) and Mutlib Khan P.W. Had gone to the house of Zarghun Shah for demanding Rs,600 statedly outstanding against Zarghun Shah. This led to an altercation between Zarghun Shah and Hashim. Waris and Javed brothers of Zarghun Shah caught hold of the complainant and Hashim deceased whereas Zarghun Shah inflicted Chhuri blows in consequence of which Hashim and complainant Asif sustained injuries.
Hashim succumbed to the injuries and expired in the way.
3. It may be observed here that on the same night at about 8-30 p.m. a case was registered at Police Station University Town, Peshawar vide F.I.R. No,205 under sections 337-F(2)/34, P.P.C. At the behest of complainant Waris (one of the accused persons in case F.I.R. No,204) in which Hashim and Asif (deceased and complainant in case No,204) were charged for causing injuries to Zarghun Shah, found simple in nature.
4. Mian Fazli Amir, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of the bail application, mainly contended that complainant party had launched aggression on the petitioner party and that in view of the existence of cross-case registered vide F.I.R. No,205, dated 20-3-2003, it has yet to be ascertained as to which of the party is aggressor and who has been aggressed upon. To substantiate the contentions, he placed reliance on Muhammad Hussain v. The State 1993 PCr.LJ Lahore page 623.
5. Syed Manzoor Ahmad, learned State Counsel on the other hand opposed the bail application and submitted that the counter-version reflected in F.I.R. No,205, dated 20-3-2003 is an afterthought and petitioner cannot derive benefit of it.
6. I have heard at length the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the material on record. Without highlighting merits of the case I find that petitioner is directly charged in the promptly lodged report for murder of Hashim deceased and attempted murder of Asif complainant. The medical report and witnesses of the occurrence fully support the charge.
7. It needs no reiteration that in cases of counter-version the rule followed is that if one party is granted bail the other party is also entitled to the same relief, but that rule would be applicable in cases of genuine counter-version. In the instant case I find that mere filing of cross-case against each other cannot be considered a good ground for release of the petitioner on bail, unless an element of genuineness is there. If an authority is needed on the point reference can be made to 1992 SCM R 501 and 1995 SCM R 860.
8. In view of above discussion, I feel that petitioner has not succeeded to make out a case for grant of bail. His application fails which is hereby dismissed, and bail is refused.