' KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.---It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is 12 hours delay in lodging the F.I.R.; that only injury attributed to the petitioner is on the thigh of the deceased; that he has been falsely implicated in this case; that he has no motive to commit the murder of the deceased and that the motive is attributed to the co-accused; that no recovery has been effected from him; that the deceased died 22 days after the occurrence; that two co- accused have been granted bail; that in fact there are 15 injuries on the person of the deceased but the same have not been mentioned in the F.I.R. And that case of petitioner is of further inquiry falling under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
2. On the other hand learned State Counsel submits that petitioner is named in the F.I.R.; that he is the person who opened the fire upon which the co-accused fired at the deceased; that pistol has been recovered from him; that Injuries Nos.5 to 11 are wound of surgical and that the offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr. P.C.
3. Heard. I have gone through the F.I.R., post-mortem report and impugned order. As far as delay in lodging the F.I.R. Is concerned, same has been explained in the F.I.R. Because first of all the complainant was busy in order to save the life of the deceased and he remained busy for his treatment. He is the person who came along with his co-accused and opened the attack and fired at the deceased which hit on the thigh of the deceased. He remained absconder. Recovery has been effected from him. The offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. No ground for bail is made out. This petition stands dismissed.