' ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.--- Criminal Miscellaneous Application No, 84-L of 2016 ' This miscellaneous application is allowed and the documents appended therewith are permitted to be brought on the record of the main petition. Disposed of.
Criminal Petition No, 53-L of 2016
2. Through this petition Muhammad Ramzan petitioner has sought, leave tb appeal against the order dated 01.12.2015 passed by a learned Judge-in-Chamber of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Miscellaneous No, 9895-B of 2015 whereby post-arrest bail was refused to him in the cross-version of case FIR No, 429 registered at Police Station Noshehra V irkan, District Gujranwala on 09.01.2014 in respect of offences under sections 302, 311, 148 and 149, P.P.C.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record we have noticed that the petitioner belongs to the complainant party of the FIR registered in this case and he had subsequently been implicated in this case as an accused person through a cross-version advanced by the opposite party. According to the cross-version the petitioner was armed with a rifle and he had caused an injury with the same on the body of Humaira deceased. The said cross- version A had also alleged that a co-accused of the petitioner namely Muhammad Anwar, armed with a pistol, had also effectively fired at Humaria deceased. The Postmortem Examination Report pertaining to the deadbody of Humaira deceased showed that the said deceased had sustained only one firearm injury on her left thigh and, thus, the only firearm injury received by the said deceased stood attributed to two accused persons, i,e, the present petitioner and his co-accused namely Muhammad Anwar. The Post-mortem Examination Report further shows that a bullet had been recovered from the firearm injury received by the said lady and during the investigation a gun had been recovered from the petitioner's custody whereas a pistol had been recovered from Muhammad Anwar co-accused. This prima facie indicates that the medical evidence available on the record may not be supporting the case of the prosecution vis-a-vis the role played by the petitioner. Apart from that the case in hand is a case of different versions advanced by the rival parties and in the above mentioned backdrop of lack of support from the medical evidence vis-a- vis the role attributed to the petitioner we have found the case against the petitioner to be a case calling for further inquiry into his guilt. The petitioner had been arrested in connection with this case on 02.10.2014, i,e, about a year and a half ago and his trial has not witnessed any progress so far.
The investigation of this case has already been finalized and a Challan has been submitted and thus, physical custody of the petitioner is not required at this stage for the purposes of investigation. It is trite that the concession of bail ought not to be withheld by way of premature punishment.
4. For what has been discussed above this petition is converted into an appeal and the same is allowed and consequently Muhammad Ramzan petitioner is admitted to bail in the above mentioned criminal case subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs, 2,00,000/- (Rupees two hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.