'ZAFAR IQBAL CHAUDHRY, J.--Through this petition under section 498, Cr.P.C. The petitioners seek bail before arrest in case F. I. R. No, 34, dated 2-2-2008, registered under sections 324/ 337-A(i)/148/149, P.P.C. Read with section 302, P.P.C. Added subsequently at Police Station Tanda, District Gujrat.
2. Brief allegation against the petitioners as per contents of the F.I.R. Is that on 18-2-2008 at 12-00 noon, Khan Muhammad father of Muhammad Afzal complainant came out of Polling Station, Basic Health Unit Surkhpur after casting his vote. In the meanwhile, Arshad Hussain and Sarfraz Hussain armed with rifles, Nazir Ahmad (petitioner) and Bilal Aziz armed with dandas, Jamshaid Iqbal, Azhar Iqbal (petitioners) armed with dandas, Javed Iqbal armed with rifle, Shabbir Hussain (petitioner) armed with rifle came there. Arshad co-accused raised lalkara to finish Khan Muhammad and gave butt blow on the head of Khan Muhammad who fell down whereafter Sarfraz inflicted butt blows on the nose. Then Azhar Iqbal and Shabbir Hussain started beating him with dandas and butts of rifles hitting on the different parts of the body of father of the complainant, who became unconscious and considering the father of the complainant as dead they left him and started firing in the air. They also raised lalkaras that if any one came near, he would also be killed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners have been involved in this case on account of mala fide of the complainant, who has concealed the real facts in the F.I.R. Whereas six persons from the petitioners' side including Azhar Iqbal, Jamshaid Iqbal, and Nazir Ahmad petitioner had been injured in the said occurrence due to the aggression of the complainant party and due to the undue influence of the complainant, he has involved them falsely in this case. It is also contended that cross-version has also been registered in this case and it is yet to be determined that who was the aggressor.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional Prosecutor General assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposes the bail application on the ground that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R.
With specific roles, whose presence at the spot at the time occurrence is even admitted by the petitioners and no mala fide on the part of the complainant has been alleged to falsely implicate them in the present case; that the petitioners were armed with deadly weapon, who along with the co-accused caused injuries to Khan Muhammad father of the complainant and they are not entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail, and that recoveries are yet to be effected from the petitioners.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the record with due care and caution. From the perusal of the record it has transpired that six persons from the petitioners' side were also injured during the same occurrence, but their injuries have not been explained by the complainant in the F.I.R. On the other hand as per medical evidence there were only five injuries on the body of Khan Muhammad deceased and 8 accused have been involved from the petitioners side. Nazir Ahmad and Jamshaid Iqbal petitioners have not been attributed any role whatsoever daring the occurrence whereas Azhar Iqbal and Shabbir petitioners have not been ascribed any specific injury and only general role has been alleged against them that they along with Javed Iqbal co-accused also caused injuries hitting on different parts of body. Injuries on the head and the nose have been specifically attributed to the co-accused. Investigating Officer present in Court admits that cross-version has already been registered against the complainant party as well. At this stage, even from the bare perusal of the F.I.R. It is prima facie made out that it was a case of sudden flare up, which had taken place on the polling day at the time of election.
The F.I.R. Was got lodged with the delay of two days wherein the complainant has explained the injuries on the person of Khan Muhammad deceased, but,kept mum about the role played by them during the occurrence for causing injuries to six persons from the accused party. It is a case of two versions and which party is aggressor will be determined by the learned Trial Court after recording of evidence. Keeping in view the role allegedly attributed to the petitioners as noted above, they cannot be sent behind the bars merely for the reason that ,recoveries are yet to be effected as it would not advance the prosecution case any further. For the time being, the petitioners have succeeded in making out a case of bail before arrest and mala fide on the part of the complainant party is crystal clear that they have involved maximum number of accused in this case by attributing general role to them. Hence, this application is accepted and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners vide order dated 4-7-2008 is hereby confirmed subject to their furnishing bail bonds within seven days in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. However, it is clarified that the findings of this Court are tentative assessm ent of the evidence on the record at present and will not prejudice the case of either party at the trial.