The post arrest bail has been claimed by the petitioner Muhammad Ramzan in a case F.I.R. No, 43/2011 dated 31.1.2011 registered under Sections 302/34, PPC at Police Station Shah Jamal District Muzaffargrah.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he summoned Muhammad Arif, the son of the complainant from his shop and his co-accused fired at him which hit on his chest who succumbed to injures.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the case against the petitioner is false; he has been leveled with the only allegation of summoning of the deceased from the shop and no other overt act has been attributed to the petitioner therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail. He has relied upon "Zohra Khanim us. The State (2009 SCMR 754.
4. Learned D.P.G. for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this bail petition and contended that it was the petitioner who summoned the deceased from the shop and in furtherance of their common intention of the accused/petitioner Muhammad Arif has been done to death by his co-accused namely Muhammad Sharif.
5. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned D.P.G. for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant and also perused the record.
6. The simple allegation against the petitioner is that he summoned Muhammad Arif who was present in his Karyana Shop and his co-accused Muhammad Sharif fired at him with his pistol which hit on his chest and proved fatal to his life. No other overt act has been attributed to the petitioner except that he summoned the deceased from his shop. The question whether he shared the common intention with the co-accused, is required further inquiry. Deeper appreciation of evidence is not required at this stage.
7. In these circumstances, this petition is allowed and the petition r is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of s. 1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.