' SYED MUHAMMAD KAZIM RAZA SHAMSI, J.---Saqib Ali petitioner seeks his release on bail in case F.I.R. No.233, dated 11-6-2012, registered under sections 302, 148 and 149, P.P.C. With Police Station Sadar Pasrur, District Sialkot.
2. As per contents of the F.I.R. The petitioner while armed with pistol fired at Arif Hussain deceased, the brother of the complainant, hitting on his left side of the neck under the ear.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that although in the F.I.R. a specific injury has been attributed to the petitioner but the complainant in the second breath in Zimini No.1 got corrected his omission of attributing the role of firing to the petitioner instead of his co-accused Armaghan.
He maintained that in the supplementary statement lodged promptly by the complainant, the petitioner has been shown armed with 'Sota'. At the relevant time. Learned counsel added that a general role of beating alongwith other co-accused has been allocated to the petitioner, which fact is not supported by the postmortem examination as the dead body was having two injuries with blunt weapon when the autopsy was conducted. He further submitted that the case of the petitioner calls further probe into the allegation, thus he is entitled for the concession of bail.
4. While opposing the petition, learned Deputy Prosecutor-General, assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant, argued that the bail cannot be granted merely on the ground that the case in hand is of two versions. In this connection, learned counsel for the complainant has referred to the judgment of the Apex Court recorded in the case of Muhammad Abbasi v. The State and another (2011 SCM R 1606). He further argued that the petitioner has failed to make out a case of any against the complainant, due to which he was falsely implicated in the case. He added that the petitioner along with his co-accused gave merciless beating to the innocent person and has also caused death by inflicting injury on the vital part of his body, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the concession of bail.
5. Parties heard and record perused.
6. The judgment cited by the learned counsel for the complainant has been examined in which it is observed by the Apex Court that the Court should not exercise discretion in favour of an accused merely on the ground that the case contains two versions, rather the Court should rely upon other material brought on the record by the prosecution including the F.I.R., statement of the complainant under section 161, Cr.P.C. As well as incriminating and circumstantial evidence for tentative assessm ent whether the accused was involved in the commission of the offence or not.
Keeping in view the guidelines provided in the afore-noted judgment of the Apex Court, the record has been thoroughly examined. The record reveals that the second version given by the complainant Khadim Hussain has never been negated by him during the investigations and has owned the same. This fact that the scribe of the application written on behalf of Khadim Hussain complainant had wrongly attributed the role of firing to Saqib Ali whereas it was Armghan, who had fired at the deceased is found mentioned in Zimin No.1, which was also recorded on 11-6-2012 i.e. Simultaneously with the registration of the F.I.R. Against the assailants. Further this fact was authenticated by P.Ws. Tunvir Hussain and Intizar Hussain by making their statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. Mentioning that Armghan accused had fired at the deceased Arif Hussain, which hit on the left side of his neck under the ear and that Saqib petitioner was armed with 'Sota' at the relevant time. During the investigations the pistol was not recovered at the instance of the petitioner Saqib, rather it was recovered at the instance of Armghan accused. These facts thus sufficiently lead to the conclusion that the complainant had simultaneously with the registration of the F.I.R. Corrected the same by nominating the petitioner with the role of general beating with `Sota' and attributed the fatal shot to co-accused Armghan. This fact, as stated above, is duly supported by the statements of P.Ws. Recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. And the recovery of the pistol at the instance of Armghan. In this manner the involvement of the petitioner in the beating of deceased Arif Hussain requires further probe as the body of the deceased was having two injuries with blunt weapon, which injuries have allegedly been caused by the petitioner and his co- accused except Armghan. In this manner it is a case calling for further probe into allegations' and fit for grant of bail to the petitioner.
7. For what has been discussed above, the petition is allowed and Saqib Ali petitioner is admitted to bail on furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000 (Rupees One Lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.