' SHAH JEHAN KHAN AKHUNDZADA, J.---Accusedpetitioner Adalat Khan facing prosecution in case F.I.R. No, 90' dated 6-2-2013 under section 324, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station, Katlang District Mardan was refused by the lower Courts and now he has moved the instant petition for his release on bail.
2. Short facts of the case are that on 6-2-2013 at 19.50 hours Gul Nazir complainant in the Casualty Hospital, Mardan made a report of the incident to the effect that on the same day at 17.45 hours he along with his two sons namely Muhammad Bilal and Said Nazir had gone for work in their fields where they saw that one Khaista Khan was cutting trees from their fields who was asked to refrain from doing it, meanwhile Adalat Khan accused-petitioner armed with firearm came and started firing at the complainant party as a result of which Muhammad Bilal got hit and injured while the complainant and his other son escaped unhurt.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case.
4. The Medical officer, as per his report, has declared the injuries on the person of the complainant as Ghayr-jaifah mudihah, punishment A for which is payment of daman and imprisonment for a term of five years as Tazir. The punishment provided for the offence thus does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. Moreover, all the injuries on the person of the injured are on non-vital part of his body and in this regard contention of the learned counsel for the accused- petitioner is that seat and locale of injuries on the person of the injured are self inflicted because the same have not been described either grievous or dangerous to life. This contention of the learned c unsel for the accused-petitioner seems to have force in it because neithe any bone of the victim has been exposed nor fractured and the in ured was discharged from the hospital on the following day of the o currence. Hence in this view of the matter in the light of grounds and reasons agitated by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioner, his case calls further probe which entitles him to the concession of bail within the meaning of subsection (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C. The occurrence has taken place on 6-2-2013 while the accused-petitioner has been produced by the elders of the locality in the police station on 10-2-2013. He remained in police custody but neither any incriminating was recovered from him nor he has made any confession.
The investigation in the case is complete and the petitioner is no more required for the purpose of investigation, hence no useful purpose would be served if the petitioner is kept in custody for an indefinite period. This Court is, therefore, inclined to extend the concession of bail to him.
5. Consequently, this bail application is accepted and the accused-petitioner is directed to be released on bail provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees One lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate who shall see that the sureties must be local, reliable and men of means.
' The above are the reasons of my short order announced on 12-4-2013.