' ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.---Through this petition Muhammad Sabir alias Kali petitioner has sought post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,154 registered at Police Station Sarai Mughal, District Kasur on 6-7-2003 for offences under sections 148/302/324/149, P.P.C . During the investigations sections 337-A(ii)/337-F(ii)/337-F(iii)/337-L(2), P.P. C. Were added to the F.I.R.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed that the case in hand is one of two versions, i.e, one advanced by the complainant party through the F.I.R. And the other advanced by the accused party through a cross-version which had been lodged on the very next day of the alleged occurrence. From the complainant's side one person had lost his life and two others had received injuries on their persons whereas from the accused side one person had died and four other persons, including the present petitioner, had sustained injuries. It has conspicuously been found by this Court that the death of one person and the injuries of four others belonging to the A accused party had not even been mentioned in the F.I.R. Lodged by the complainant. It is not disputed that the present petitioner had not caused any injury to Muhammad Naeem deceased and the only role attributed to the petitioner in the F.I.R. Was that he caused injuries to Mukhtar Ahmad and Boota Masih P.Ws. With a Sota. According to the F.I.R.
The petitioner had caused three injuries on the head of Mukhtar Ahmad P.W. With a Sota and it had also been mentioned in the F.I.R. That one Tariq co-accused had also given an hatchet blow on the head of Mukhtar Ahmad P.W.A perusal of the medico-legal Certificate issued in respect of Mukhtar Ahmad P.W., however, shows that the said witness had received only two injuries on his head. It is not disputed that Tariq co-accused has already been opined by the local police to be innocent and, resultantly, his name has been placed in column No,2 of the Challan. It had been mentioned by the complainant in the F.I.R. That the present petitioner had also caused injuries to Boota Masih P.W. But no seat of any such injury had been specified in the F.I.R. The learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently maintained that no medico-legal certificate of Boota Masih is available with the challan submitted before the learned trial Court. It has already been observed B above that the present petitioner had not caused any injury to Muhammad Naeem deceased. In the above mentioned peculiar circumstances of this case it is still not clear as to whether the petitioner was one of the those who had aggressed against the complainant party or his own party had been aggressed against by the complainant party. The challan in this case has already been submitted after completion of investigation and, thus, continued custody of the petitioner in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.
3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed C and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.