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 10.08.2006 registered under Section 302, 324, 337/A(i).. (ii) ;vi) L(1) & L(2), 148/149. P.P.C, at Police Station Nawan Lahore. District T.T. Singh on the appellant of Fayyaz Ahmad, the complainant
2. The brief facts of the case as alleged in the F.I.R, are that on 05.08.2006 at about 7.30 p.m. The complainant alongwith his son Muhammad Usman and other persons of the locality had participated in a Punchayat, held at Chak No 278/J.B in respect of a theft committed in the Poultry faim 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. There upon Waqas (petitioner) gave slaps to Usman, In the meanwhile Waqar' co-accused inflicted danda blows .To Usman first hitting over his right ear & 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 .Snare the complainant party and Adeel Masih and' Saiamat Masilr co-accused caught hold of Basharat (nephew of the complainant) and gave bearing to him. In the meantime Ahmad 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 Saiamat Masih co-accused gave first blows to Basharat (victim). On seeing this Rehan Ashraf and Saeed Ahmad PWs alongwith 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 tor 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 resiting 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 purview of further inquiry and he may be allowed ball.
5. The learned Additional Prosecutor General has opposed this bail petition on the ground that the petitioner had slapped the deceased and offence fails 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 tor indefinite period due to the role ascribed on 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.