' ABDUL QADIR MENGAL, J.--This application under section 497, Cr.P.C. Has been moved in case F.I.R.
No,75 of 2012, dated 9th April, 2017 for offences under section 302/34, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Brewery, Quetta.
2. Brief facts leading to filing the present bail .Application are that one Ahsan Sardar son of Sardar Masih on 9th April, 2012, at 7-55 p.m. Lodged report with Police Station Brewery, Quetta, through a written report, wherein that he alleged that he alongwith his brother Kashif Sardar and other family members had gone to St. John Vianny Church to attend a religious ceremony, where the accused Abneer extended abuses to Kashif stating that he would not let him alive. It was 7-15 p.m. When they reached near to their houses situated at Spini Road, Quetta, there they saw Ishaq, Samson John, Abneer and Azmeer, who were heating Kashif and they also dragging him in the street. On their intervention the accused also attacked upon him and caused injury to him at his finger. The accused were giving blows of kicks and fists to Kashif, however, he was saved from accused and they took Kashif towards hospital, but he succumbed to injuries and died.
3.
The accused were arrested and then challan was submitted before the court of Sessions Judge, Quetta, where almost all the material witnesses were examined, when a bail' application was moved, however, same was dismissed vide order dated 15th August, 2012, hence the instant bail application.
4. I have heard Syeda Tehmina Samad, Advocate for the applicants while Mr. Yahya Khan, Deputy Prosecutor General was heard on behalf of the State.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants mainly contended that there is no evidence on record that applicants have attacked upon the deceased with intention to kill him, so as admittedly no weapon in the present matter has been used, which could show that applicant had any intention to kill or cause serious injuries to the deceased. On contrary record shows that deceased had died on account of cardiac disease or attack.
6. On the other hand learned State counsel opposed the bail application on the ground that as the applicants have been charged under sections 302/34 P.P.C., whereas evidence also has come on record in respect of the alleged offence, which bring the case of applicants under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, the applicants are not entitled to be granted bail.
7. After hearing both the sides and perusing the record of the case, it appears that the allegations against the all applicants is that they dragged the deceased and gave him blows of kicks and fists.
This evidence also has been supported by the Doctor and he in his statement has mentioned the nature of injuries which reads as follows: "(1) Swelling on left cheek.
(2) Brusis on right elbow joint.
(3) Lacerated wound on little finger of right hand.
(4) Old history is heart (Angioplasty) toad expired during First Aid due to chest pain."
8. The above evidence at best shows that the offence does not fall under section 302/34, P.P.C. And it is yet to be determined whether the case of the applicants falls under section 315, P.P.C. Or otherwise. Admittedly for grant or refusal of bail there is a no need to assess the evidence thoroughly. The best course for determination of a bail application is to look into the matter cursorily and assess the same tentatively. As such the above circumstances at best do not show for commission of Qatl-e-amd punishable under section 302, P.P.C. Legally, benefit of doubt goes in favour of applicants at the stage of bail. In this respect I have fortified my view from the case of "Aslam Khan v. Qaiser Khan" 1999 PCr.LJ 582 Lahore., which reads as under:-- "---S.497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34---Bail---Benefit of doubt---Grant or refusal of bail is determinable on basis of material available in nature of F.I.R., statement of witnesses, medical report and other evidence collected during investigation---Benefit of slight doubt arising in case is necessarily to be given to accused even at bail stage."
9. Thus without any detailed appreciation, it is suffice to say that the alleged offence against the applicants at this stage requires further inquiry, therefore, the applicants are entitled to be granted bail. As such, bail application is allowed provided if each of the applicant furnish surety in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (two lac) and PR bond of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar of this Court or trial Court. The observations made hereinabove are purely tentative in nature, hence, the trial Court shall not be influenced from the same. With the above observations. The instant application stands disposed of.
' These are the reasons of my short order dated 24th August 2012.