' Through the instant petition, Usman Abid petitioner, seeks his post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 482 dated 28.06.2013 under Sections 324/337-F(iii)/34, PPC, registered at Police Station Cheliyak, District Multan.
2. As per contents of the F.I.R. On 28.06.2013 at about 3:30 p.m. The petitioner made fire at complainant's son namely Kamran, which hit on his leg. Hence, this case.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has falsely been involved in this case by the complainant. Further contents that the recovery has been planted upon the petitioner; that the offence under Section 324, PPC is not made out, whereas the offence under Section 337- F(iii), PPC does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C.; that recovery of crime empty has not been made from the spot; that the petitioner is previously non-convict.
Further contends that pre-arrest bail of co-accused namely Noman has already been confirmed by the learned trial Court. Lastly prayed that the petitioner be admitted to bail.
4. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor General assisted by learned counsel for complainant vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that specific role has been attributed to the petitioner for causing fire-arm injury to Kamran on his leg and medical is in line with the F.I.R.; that there is no contradiction in the medical and ocular account and petitioner has previous history of alike nature offence. Next contended that report under Section 173, Cr.P.C. Has been submitted. Lastly prayed for dismissal of bail petition.
5. Heard. Record perused.
6. The perusal of record transpires that the petitioner has been involved in this case with the specific role That he made fire which hit complainant's son Kamran on his leg but had it been the intention to kill the complainant's son, then there would have been a repetition of fire, which is lacking in the instant case. Moreover, as per Medico Legal Report, the injured sustained injury on his leg, same was declared as 'Ghayr Jaifah Mutalahimah', falling under Section 337- F(iii), PPC, entailing maximum sentence of three years, hence, the same does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. Reliance is placed on 'Shahid Raziq alias Shahid versus The State through Advocate-General and another' (2012 P.Cr.L.J 1560). The injury attributed to the petitioner is on non-vital part of the body, which prima facie shows that the petitioner had no intention I whatsoever to kill Kamran-injured. The police file is silent about the previous conviction of the petitioner.
7. In view of above, the question whether the case of the petitioner falls within the ambit of Section 324, PPC, needs further probe and inquiry. The petitioner is behind the bars and cannot be kept for an indefinite period as the trial is at its initial stage and hi ' further incarceration would be nothing but a punishment, which is not the intention of law.
8. Therefore, the instant petition is allowed and petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,200,000/- (Two lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. However, learned trial Court is at liberty recall this bail granting order, after giving notice to the petitioner, if he misuses the same.