' SARDAR MUHAMMAD SHAMIM KHAN, J.---Bashir Ahmad, petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,454 of 2010 dated 22-9-2010 for the offence under sections 302, 324, 109 and 34 P.P.C.
Registered at Police Station Noor Shah, District Sahiwal.
2. Precise allegations as narrated in the F.I.R. Are that on 21-9-2010 at about 7-00 p.m. Complainant along with Mst. Rani Bibi, Aftab, Zillah and Malik Ali was available at his Dera. In the meanwhile Mumtaz, Riaz, Bashir Ahmad (petitioner) and Ramzan armed with fire arms reach there. Mumtaz Shah fired at the complainant which hit Mst. Rani Bibi on her forehead, who was sitting besides him.
Second fire of Mumtaz Shah hit on the right hand of Ajjam Shah, complainant. Allegation against Bashir Ahmad, petitioner was that he fired at the complainant which hit on his left shoulder and back of chest; whereas fire of Ramzan, co-accused hit Zillah on his right thigh. Mst. Rani Bibi succumbed to injuries after registration of F.I.R., so, offence under section 302, P.P.C. Was added.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was delay of four hours in lodging of F.I.R.
Which was not properly explained by the complainant in the F.I.R.; that motive of the occurrence was not attributed to the petitioner; that there was no allegation against the petitioner that he caused any injury on the person of Mst. Rani Bibi, deceased; that the only allegation against the petitioner was that he fired with his pistol .30-bore which hit on the left shoulder and back of chest of the complainant Ajjam Shah; that both injuries attributed to the petitioner were simple in nature; that no empty of :30-bore was secured from the place of occurrence; that Mst. Saban Bibi, mother of Mst. Rani Bibi, deceased filed a private complaint titled "Mst. Saban Bibi v. Ajjam Shah and others" alleging therein that Ajjam Shah, complainant of this case himself fired with his rifle at her daughter Mst. Rani Bibi, who succumbed to her injuries in the hospital, in order to falsely involve his enemies in this case; that her statement was recorded by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sahiwal on 2-2-2011 but ultimately this complaint was withdrawn by Mst. Saban. Bibi, due to the pressure of Ajjam Shah, who was a history sheeter. It has further been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that Muhammad Mumtaz Shah, co-accused of the petitioner also sustained injuries in this occurrence which were suppressed by the prosecution in the F.I.R. And that Muhammad Mumtaz Shah, co- accused also filed a private complaint under sections 302, 324 and 34 P.P.C. Against Anjam Shah, complainant of this case, Muhammad Asif alias Toka, Malik Ali alias Malki and Shaukat Hussain, so, this was a case of two versions. It has lastly been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that vide case Diary No,19 dated 10-10-2010 police came to the conclusion that petitioner was not present at the scene of occurrence and was declared innocent and, that he has been falsely involved in this case as he was servant of Muhammad Mumtaz Shah, co-accused, so, the petitioner was entitled to the grant of bail. Reliance has been placed on Fazal Muhammad v. Ali Ahmad and 3 others (1976 SCM R 391), Shoaib Mehmood Butt v. Iftikhar-ul-Haq and 3 others (1996 SCM R 1845), Muhammad Sadiq and 4 others v. The State (2001 PCr.LJ 962) and Muhammad Ramzan v. Rahib and others (PLD 2010 Supreme Court 585).
4. Learned D.P.-G. And learned counsel for the complainant contend that the delay in lodging in F.I.R. Has been explained; that petitioner was specifically nominated in the F.I.R.; that there was specific allegation against him that he fired two shots with pistol .30-bore on the person of Ajjam Shah, complainant which hit him on his left shoulder and his lack; that injuries attributed to the petitioner find corroboration by medical examination of the complainant Ajjam Shah as doctor observed both injuries on his person; that during investigation pistol .30-bore was recovered from the possession of the petitioner; that although there was no allegation against the petitioner that he caused injury on the person of Mst. Rani Bibi, deceased yet as he came at the place of occurrence armed with pistol .30-bore, so he was also vicariously liable for the murder of Mst. Rani Bibi and they have prayed for dismissal of this bail petition.
5. I have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for parties and perused the record with their able assistance.
6. 'This occurrence took place on 21-9-2010 at about 7200 p.m. Whereas matter was reported to the police at 11-15 p.m. With the delay of about four hours which was not properly explained by the complainant. The petitioner was not connected with the motive part of the prosecution story rather motive was attributed to Mumtaz Shah, co-accused. There was no allegation against the petitioner that he fired at Mst. Rani Bibi, deceased. The allegation against the petitioner in the F.I.R. Was that he fired at Ajjam Shah, complainant which hit him on his left shoulder and back of chest. Perusal of Medico Legal Certificate of Ajjam Shah, complainant reveals that. Injuries Nos.1 and 4 were attributed to the petitioner, which were kept under observation but no final result regarding these injuries was given by the doctor, so, these injuries would be deemed to be simple in nature. Mst.
Saban Bibi, mother of Mst. Rani Bibi, deceased filed a private complaint against Ajjam Shah, complainant of this case and both injured eye-witnesses. According to her version Ajjam Shah fired at her daughter Mst. Rani Bibi, who succumbed to her injuries so that he could involve his enemies in this case. Her statement was recorded by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sahiwal but ultimately she withdrew the same. Pir, Muhammad Mumtaz Shah, co-accused also sustained injuries in this occurrence but injuries on his person were suppressed by the complainant party in The F.I.R.
Regarding this occurrence Muhammad Mumtaz Shah, co-accused also filed a private complaint under sections 302 and 34, P.P.C. Against Ajjam Shah, complainant of this case, Muhammad Asif alias Toka, Malik Ali, injured eyewitnesses of this case and Shaukat etc. After recording cursory evidence of the complainant, learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sahiwal summoned Ajjam Shah and others to face the trial, in this complaint case vide his order dated 8-2-2011, so this was a case of three versions. Which party was aggressor, would be determined by the learned trial Court after recording evidence. The petitioner and Riaz, co-accused were declared innocent by the police vide case Diary No,19 dated 10-102010.
7. In view of the above discussion, petition in hand is accepted and petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court.