WAQAR HASSAN MIR, J. - The petitioner through the instant petition seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 145/2005, dated 11.2.2005 registered under Sections 302, 324, 34, P.P.C. With Police Station Baghbanpura, Lahore.
2. The version of the complainant as per the F.I.R. Is that on 11.2.2005 at about 11.00 a.m., a scuffle took place between his cousin Naveed Ali and the petitioner on account of some money transaction. When complainant's brother Babar Ali tried to rescue him, the petitioner abused him.
His brother Babar Ali and Naveed Ali gave slaps to the petitioner. Afterwards the inhabitants of the locality tried to patch up the matter but the petitioner extended threats of dire consequences. At 3.45 p.m. when the complainant alongwith Babar Ali, his brother and Muhammad Imran son of Muhammad Muzaffar were going to Sufi Nazir, a respectable of the area to reconcile the matter,.
Muhammad Qasim armed with pump action 12 bore, Muhammad Kashif alia Kashi armed with repeater and one unknown person armed with pistol 30 bore were standing in the Chowk. Qasim raised a lalkara and fired with weapon, which hit on the chest and upper part of left arm, second fire made by Qasim hit him on his backside of left flank. Third fire made by Kashif alias Kashi hit his brother on backside of loin. All the three accused fled away from the spot while making aerial firing.
Hence this F.I.R.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. And has been involved through supplementary statement; that the petitioner and the complainant are resident of the same locality and well-known to each other, hence involvement of the petitioner in the supplementary statement is an afterthought; that the fatal injury caused to the deceased is attributed to Qasim accused; that co-accused Rizwan Kashif has been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 14.6.2006 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3525- B/2006.
4. On the other hand, learned D.P.G. Assisted by- learned counsel for the complainant submits that the petitioner remained fugitive from law and declared P.O. On 16.3.2005; that he was arrested on 8.2.2010, therefore, direction may be issued to the learned Trial Court to conclude the trial as early as possible.
5. Heard. Record perused.
6. The petitioner though not nominated in the F I R. But was involved through supplementary statement. He seeks bail on the rule of propriety but as he had remained fugitive from law, which has hampered the trial so far. Therefore, I am reticent to consider the case of the petitioner for bail.
Hence, the petition is dismissed with a direction to the learned Trial Court to conclude the trial with concerted efforts as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the receipt of this order under intimation to this Court through Deputy Registrar (Judicial).