Shaukat Ali petitioner seeks his release on bail in case FIR No, 372 dated 30.10.2012 registered under Sections 302, 109, 148 & 149, PPC at Police Station Garh, District Faisalabad.
2. As per crime report, on the day of occurrence at about 7.00 a.m. the nephew of the complainant Ashiq Ali, Nasir and Nosher were going to Katchery Tandlianwala for attending the case when they were intercepted by Haji, Shaukat and Mursaleen who were ambushing in the cotton crop. Shaukat and Mursaleen caught hold of Ashiq Ali from his arm while Haji son of Ameer made a direct fire with his repeater gun .12 bore hitting on the right side of the chest. The injured succumbed to the injuries at the spot. The motive for the occurrence was that the brother of Shaukat and Mursaleen namely Munir was murdered and the complainant party was the accused in that FIR No, 70/2012, due to which grudge, Ashiq Ali has been killed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the role of holding the deceased with his arm has been attributed to the petitioner, which role has not been substantiated on the record and the petitioner has been booked in the instant case due to the enmity as admitted by the complainant in the FIR. It is further contended that the mala fide of the complainant for falsely implicating the petitioner is established from the fact that all the family members of the petitioner have been booked in this case while allocating different roles for restraining them for the prosecution of the criminal case lodged against the complainant of the case. Learned counsel prayed for the grant of bail in these circumstances.
4. The arguments made by learned counsel for the complainant has been controverted by learned Deputy Prosecutor General, assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, with the submission that the fire made by Ameer was from a very close range as is evident from the postmortem report which could only be possible if a person receiving the injury is holding by some other person and this allegation of holding levelled against the petitioner is substantiated from the post- mortem report. He further contended that the petitioner has specifically been nominated in the FIR with categorical role, whose false implication is beyond any shadow of doubt. Learned counsel prayed for dismissal of the bail petition.
5. Parties heard. Record perused.
6. It is evident from the file that the brother of the petitioner was murdered and in this respect an FIR was lodged against the present complainant side. The involvement of the petitioner with the allegation of holding the deceased by his arm, appears to involve whole of the family members of the petitioner as one arm was allegedly hold by the petitioner while the other one by Mursaleen when Haji brother of Shaukat fired at the deceased. Similarly, the determination of the vicarious liability at this stage is not possible. Admittedly, the parties are having animosity inter-se therefore, in these circumstances, determination of the role played by the petitioner in the incident requires further inquiry. In view of this, the petitioner is found entitled for the concession of bail.
7. In view of above, this petition is allowed and Shaukat Ali 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 the learned trial Court.