Through this petition under section 497 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case FIR No.459/2014, dated 15.11.2014 under sections 337A(iii), 354, 379, 148, 149 PPC registered at Police Station Sarai Mughal, District Kasur.
2. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the record of this case has also been perused with their able assistance. This is bail after arrest and deeper appreciation is not allowed at this stage. It has been noticed by this Court that there is a delay of eighteen days in the registration of FIR which has not been explained by the complainant. As per FIR the role attributed to the present petitioner is that he gave butt blow of pistol to the daughter of the complainant which landed on her nose and caused fracture but during investigation it has come on record that pistol has not been used by the petitioner. The injury attributed to the petitioner has been declared by the doctor as 337A(iii) PPC. It is settled law that while deciding bail petition maximum punishment is not to be considered and the punishment likely to be awarded to the petitioner according to the facts and circumstances of this case is to be considered. Even otherwise, the offences with which the petitioner is charged are triable by Magistrate Section 30 who can award punishment upto seven years only. Admittedly the petitioner is previous non- convict and never involved in any other case. Section 337N(2) PPC also comes to rescue the petitioner which provides that sentence of imprisonment can only be awarded if accused is a previous convict, habitual or desperate criminal or the offence has been committed in the name of or on the pretext of honour. In this case the petitioner can only be burdened with payment of Arsh or Daman. Moreover as far as section 379 PPC is concerned, a joint role is attributed to the accused so its attraction to the extent of the present petitioner would be determined by the learned trial court after recording evidence. He was arrested in this case on 26.12.2014 and since then he is behind the bars. Investigation of the case is complete and he is no more required for further investigation. No useful purpose would be served by keeping him behind the bars, thus, his further incarceration in jail would not serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.
3. For what has been discussed above the case of the petitioner becomes one of further inquiry covered by sub-section (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is granted bail after arrest subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.
4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only.