The petitioner, Shahbaz has sought post arrest bail through Crl.Misc. No.2129-B/2015 and petitioners, Muhammad Imran, Sakhawat Ali Sodagar and Muhammad Aslam seek bail before arrest through Crl.Misc. No.2120-B/2015, being accused of case-FIR No.532/2014, dated 01.09.2014, under sections 337 A(i), 337-F(i), 337-A(ii), 337-A(iii), 337-L(2), 148, 149, 109 PPC, registered at police station Tatlay Aali, Gujranwala. Both the petitions shall be decided compositely through this single order.
2. The complainant, Inayat Ullah has alleged in the FIR that Shahbaz (petitioner), Sakhawat Ali Sodagar (petitioner) and Muhammad Aslam (petitioner), all armed with dandas, joined by their armed co-accused attacked the complainant-party and mercilessly beat them to inflict multiple injuries on various parts of their bodies; Manzoor Ahmad, Muhammad Ali, his mother Mst. Hajran Bibi, his wife Mst. Mumtaz Bibi and Muhammad Farooq were injured by the accused during the occurrence; the motive behind the occurrence pertained to a previous dispute between the parties.
3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the story of FIR as narrated by the complainant could not be verified by the investigating officer during the course of investigation and he found the petitioners innocent by labelling the complainant-side the liars; the medical evidence is inconsistent with the eyewitness account and it does not divulge any such injury on the persons of the injured witnesses, which may fall within the mischief of a non-bailable offence; the case of Shahbaz accused categorically opens to further probe as prosecution is short of evidence as to which of the two injuries on his head, one falling under section 337-A(iii) PPC and the other under section 337-A(i) PPC had been caused by him; the other petitioners did not do much during the alleged occurrence and opinion of the investigating officer qua their innocence makes the situation still rosier for them; they have joined the investigation and no longer required for the said purpose.
4. The petitioners' quest for bail has been opposed by the learned Deputy Prosecutor General Punjab assisted by learned counsel for the complainant who have contended that the petitioners are named in the FIR with specific roles of inflicting injuries on Mst. Hajran Bibi, the mother, Mst.
Mumtaz Bibi, the wife of the complainant, Manzoor Ahmad, Muhammad Ali and Farooq; the injury attributed to Shahbaz accused on the head of Manzoor Ahmad injured has been declared Shajjah- i-Hashimah, which is punishable under section 337-A(iii)PPC, with 10 years imprisonment; all the petitioners along with their co-accused committed the crime with community of intention, hence each of them is vicariously liable for the crime committed; three of the petitioners, Muhammad Imran, Sakhawat Ali Sodagar and Muhammad Aslam seek bail before arrest, which may not be granted as weapons of offence are still to be recovered from them; lastly submits that the prosecution case overflows with incriminating material against the petitioners.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is observed that Shahbaz accused has been saddled with the liability of inflicting an injury at the head of Manzoor Ahmad by means of danda. The medico-legal-report of Manzoor Ahmad injured reveals three blunt weapon injuries on his person, two (injury No.1 & 2) out of which are on his head while the third one is at his forearm. The medical officer has declared injury No.1 as Shajjah-i-Khafifah (337-A(i) PPC) and injury No.2 Shajjah-i-Hashimah (337-A(iii) PPC). The third one has been found Ghayr-Jaifah Damiyah (337-F(i)PPC). According to the story of FIR, Shahbaz accused caused only one injury by means of his weapon at the head of Manzoor Ahmad but his MLR, as referred to above, shows two injuries at the said locale, one (injury No.1) constituting a bailable offence and the other (injury No.2) giving rise to an offence, punishable u/s 337-A(iii) PPC with 10 years imprisonment, which is covered by the prohibitory clause of section 497(1) Cr.P.C. The contents of the FIR and the statements of the eyewitnesses, as well as that of the injured witnesses recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C do not explain in specific terms as to which one of the said injuries had been caused by Shahbaz accused/petitioner. It leads to a fair amount of doubt and inquisitiveness, as to whether the petitioner had committed a bailable or a non-bailable offence, the benefit whereof may be resolved in his favour even at this stage. To be vicariously responsible for the entire occurrence is an issue, which may better be dealt with by the learned trial court at trial. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General Punjab and learned counsel for the complainant have been asked time and again to hint at some evidence which may establish in some believable terms that fractural injury on the head of Manzoor Ahmad injured had been caused by Shahbaz/petitioner. The delay of seven days in lodgment of FIR has not been explained by the complainant in any manner. The petitioner was taken into custody on 26.11.2014 and he allegedly led to the recovery of a danda on 29.11.2014, which, according to the record, is not blood-stained. Tentative assessment of the material available renders it a case, one of further inquiry in favour of Shahbaz accused (petitioner) within the scope of section 497(2) Cr.P.C. He has, therefore, earned a right to be set at liberty. His bail application (Crl.Misc. No.2129-B/2015) stands accepted and he is granted post arrest bail subject to 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.
6. So far as the other petitioners, Muhammad Imran, Sakhawat Ali Sodagar and Muhammad Aslam, who seek bail before arrest, are concerned, they have not caused any such injury on the persons of Farooq and Manzoor Ahmad injured which may constitute a non-bailable offence. The injury attributed to Muhammad Imran accused/petitioner at the right shoulder of Farooq injured has been declared Ghayr-Jaifah Damiyah (337-F(i) PPC) and similar is the situation in respect of an injury at the wrist of Manzoor Ahmad injured, which was allegedly caused by Muhammad Aslam petitioner. Sakhawat Ali Sodagar accused (petitioner) has not been assigned any specific role in the FIR. They were found innocent during the course of first round of investigation and result of the second investigation conducted by the DSP/SDPO, Circle Kamonkey was not much different as he found them merely present at the spot empty-handed. Sending them to jail would not serve any useful purpose, as their case not only calls for further probe into their guilt within the ambit of further inquiry as envisaged by section 497(2) Cr.P.C but also within the mischief of, most probably, a bailable offence. Their application (Crl.Misc. No.2120-B/2015), therefore, is accepted and ad- interim pre-arrest bail granted to them vide order dated 18.02.2015 is confirmed subject to furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.