Petitioner Allah Rakha @ Mithu has sought post arrest bail in case FIR No.248 dated 25.6.2014 registered under Section 302/324/ 337-F(v)/109/34 PPC at Police Station Mochi Wala District Jhang.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 25.6.2014 at about 5/6:00 p.m. He along with his co-accused while armed with fire arms, in furtherance of their common intention, fired at the complainant party as a result of which Irfan Khan @ Khan received fire arms injuries, who succumbed to the injuries suffered by him at the spot whereas Shehbaz Ahmed received fire arm injury. The petitioner has been ascribed the role of single fire shot which landed on the front of chest of Irfan @ Khan deceased. During the occurrence accused Allah Rakha also allegedly received injuries with the firing of his co-accused.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. The petitioner is the nominated accused of the FIR with the allegation of specific role of firing with his pistol which landed on the front of chest of Irfan @ Khan deceased. Co-accused Javed @ Jaju allegedly fired with his pistol which hit Irfan Khan deceased on his right arm pit and a fire shot of Allah Ditta co-accused hit the deceased on the back of the deceased. According to the post mortem examination report, the only fire arm injury attributed to the present petitioner i.e. Injury No.1(b) on the front of chest of Irfan deceased is an exit/corresponding wound of injury No.1(a), which is attributed to Allah Ditta co-accused. Prima facie there is glaring contradiction in the medical evidence, story of the FIR and in the statements of PW under Section 161 Cr.P.C., which fact alone tilts the scale of justice in favour of the petitioner and calls for the case being one of further inquiry.
5. During the occurrence, the petitioner also received fire arm injuries on his person for which cross-version was recorded by the police, though disbelieved during investigation yet the fact that as to which of the party was aggressor one, shall be seen by the learned trial Court after recording of evidence. Co-accused Ishfaq Ahmad @ Ladu to whom no injury was attributed, has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 18.3.2015 in Crl. Misc. No.2670-B of 2015. The petitioner was arrested in this case on 17.9.2014 and since then he is behind the bars. He is no more required by the police for further investigation.
In view of above, the petition in hand is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.200,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court