' SHAHID HAMEED DAR, J.---The petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No,159, dated 4-8-2007, under sections 302, 324, 148, 149, 109 P.P.C.,, registered at Police Station Ahmadpur Sial, District Jhang, on the complaint of Qasim Ali Raza.
2. Precisely the story of F.I.R., as narrated by the complainant is that he along with Shaukat Ali (petitioner) and others visited Police Station Ahmadpur Sial, District Jhang in connection with the investigation of case F.I.R. No,153 of 2007, registered at the said Police Station for offences under sections 324, 148, 149, P.P.C.; on their way back, they were followed and attacked by nine motorcyclists, four known as Muhammad Aslam alias Neela armed with rifle .44 bore, Muhammad Anwar armed with rifle, Mukhtar armed with .12 bore gun and Irshad armed with .12 bore gun and five unknown, who too were armed with firearms; the fire shot made by accused Muhammad Aslam alias Neela landed at the chest of Allah Ditta deceased who fell on to the ground and died instantaneously; Muhammad Anwar accused made a fire shot with his rifle which hit the right calf of Shaukat Ali (petitioner); Mukhtar accused fired with his .12 bore gun and injured left knee of Muhammad Yasin; accused Muhammad Anwar again made a fire shot and caused an injury at the right ankle of Manzoor; the complainant and others saved themselves by lying in the fields; the occurrence was committed by the above said accused on the abetment of Faisal Abbas and Bashir.
3. Qasim Ali Raza (complainant) rendered a secondary statement on 19-10-2007 wherein he, while quoting the names of Muhammad lqbal and Ghulam Yasin contended that they informed him about the real facts of the case by stating that they along with others were moving on motorcycles towards Pir Abdul Rehman link road and on reaching near Gulluki Dhari they were intercepted by accused Shaukat Ali (petitioner), Rashid, Abdul Sattar, Manzoor, Muhammad Yasin, Muhammad Tariq and Muzaffar Ali; Shaukat Ali (petitioner) and Manzoor clasped around Allah Ditta (deceased) whereas their co-accused Rashid fired into his chest. This is how the status of Shaukat Ali was changed from a prosecution witness to that of an accused in this case.
4. The petitioner was arrested on 3-1-2012 and he led to the recovery of pistol .30 bore on 8-1-2012.
He was proceeded against under section 87, Cr.P.C. During the course of investigation as the I.O.
Obtained proclamation against him on 5-8-2008 and submitted a report under section 512, Cr.P.C.
Against him before the trial Court vide case diary dated 25-9-2008.
5. After hearing learned counsel for B the parties and perusing the record, it is observed that the petitioner is not nominated as an accused in the F.I.R. Qasim Ali Raza (complainant) posed himself an eye-witness of the occurrence along with other eye-witnesses while reporting the crime to the police and they all stuck to their stance of being the eyewitnesses of the occurrence during the course of investigation, before the supplementary statement of the complainant surfaced on the record on 19-10-2007. The prosecution has itself made it a case of two versions in respect of the petitioner, one as mentioned in the F.I.R. And the other, entailed in the aforesaid supplementary statement of the complainant. Interestingly, none of the accused mentioned in the above said secondary statement of the complainant has been shown as an accused in the F.I.R. Though the petitioner had been proceeded against under section 87, Cr.P.C. And a report under section 512, Cr.P.C. Was submitted before the trial Court against him, yet, the element of alleged abscondance does not impede the acceptance of the instant application, for the reason that the petitioner call for further inquiry into his guilt, within the meaning of section 497(2), Cr.P.C. Even otherwise, the allegation against the petitioner, to have caught the deceased at the time of firing, made by his co-accused, does not appeal to reason, as, by having done so, he must have put his own life at peril.
6. For the reasons supra, the instant application is accepted and petitioner is admitted to post- arrest bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.