' ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J.---Petitioner, Ahmad Khan son of Muhammad Khan, seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,124 of 2012 dated 17-3-2012 under sections 324, 337-F(v), 34, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Sahiwal, District Sargodha.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with his co-accused Allah Ditta while armed with .12 bore gun attacked upon the complainant's party and injured the son of the complainant, namely, Muhammad Sajid, hitting fire shot on the knee of his left leg, whereas the fire of pistol of the co-accused Allah Ditta hit the below side of right ankle of his feet: The motive behind the occurrence was that the petitioner used to tease the School girls outside the Aata Chakki of the complainant.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the co-accused. Allah Ditta was granted post- arrest bail by this Court vide order dated 1-3-2013 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No,878-B of 2013 and the case of the petitioner is at par with him; that the fire shot was not repeated by the petitioner; that the co-accused. Allah Ditta has filed a private complaint; that the petitioner is entitled to the grant of bail as the maximum punishment under section 337-F(v), P.P.C. Is 5 years which does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Places reliance on Umar Hayat v. The State and others (2008 SCM R 1621) and Muhammad Umar v. The State and another (PLD 2004 SC 477); that the petitioner was arrested on 19-4-2012 and since his arrest he is behind the bars. Lastly prays for grant of post-arrest bail to the petitioner.
4. Conversely, learned counsel for the complainant submits that .12 bore gun has been recovered from the petitioner; that the trial has commenced; that the case of the petitioner is not at par with the co-accused Allah Ditta as the motive is attributed to him and he being a. Main accused is not entitled to the concession of bail; that the police have amended the section 337-F(v) to 337F(vi), P.P.C. Which entails punishment of 7 years. Places reliance on Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Interior Islamabad v. Mrs. Amatul Jalil Khawaja and others (PLD 2003 SC 442).
5. Learned District Public. Prosecutor adopts the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the complainant and adds that the trial has commenced and if the direction is issued for its conclusion the same can be concluded within a shortest span of time.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record.
7. Although the petitioner is specifically nominated in the F.I.R., yet he is behind the bars since April 2012 and no useful purpose would be served for his continuous incarceration in jail. The case of the petitioner is at par with the case of co-accused Allah Ditta, who has been granted bail by this Court as the injury attributed to the petitioner is on the non-vital part of the body and he did not repeat the fire short, therefore, he is also entitled to the same concession. In such circumstances, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has granted bail in such like situation in case of Untar Hayat v.
The State and others reported as 2008 SCM R 1621.
' In view of the above, this bail petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
' Before parting with the order, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three months.