ZAFAR AHMED RAJPUT, J.---Through instant criminal bail application, applicants Sadoro Alias Khursheed son of Fateh Muhammad and Allah Bux son of Sadoro Alias Khursheed, above-named seek post arrest bail in Crime No, 51/2016, registered at Police Station Qubo Saeed Khan, under sections 324, 337-A(ii), 337- F(ii)/504, 148, 149, P.P.C. Their earlier application for grant of post-arrest bail bearing No, 40 of 2016 was heard and dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shandad Kot, vide order dated 05.12.2016.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 03.10.2016 at 2300 hours complainant Ali Gul son of Muhammad Urs lodged the aforesaid FIR, alleging therein that on 02.10.2016, at about 1300 hours at the land of Deedar Mastoi, the present applicants/ accused duly armed with rifle and pistol, co- accused Saleh duly armed with Kalashnikov like rifle and one un-identified accused caused firearms injuries to his son, namely, Suhno over using of passage with intention to kill him, while co- accused persons, namely, Muhammad Ameen, Moula Bux (brother and son of applicant Sadoro, respectively) and Sahib caused hatchet blow on the head, right upper hand and elbow of Suhno, who fell down and started bleeding. Thereafter, on their cries which attracted many villagers, the accused party ran away.
3. Mr. Rashid Mustafa Solangi, learned counsel for the applicants/ accused has contended that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case by the complainant party due to enmity; that there is delay of thirty-four hours in lodging FIR, therefore, consultation, deliberation and false implication of applicants cannot be ruled out; that the injuries allegedly received by the injured are neither fatal nor dangerous or on vital part of his body, as such, alleged action does not carry the ingredients of section 324 of P.P.C; that the medico-legal report does not suggest the injuries as narrated in the FIR; that all the male members of the one and same family have been implicated by the complainant with mala fide intention and ulterior motive; that the applicants are behind the bar for last thirteen months and their trial has not been concluded; that three co-accused persons, namely, Saleh, Sahib and Muhammad Ameen, who were nominated in FIR with specific role, have been let out by police for want of evidence; hence, sufficient grounds are available in the case for further enquiry.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Ghulam. Muhammad Barejo, learned counsel for the complainant, has vehemently opposed this application on the ground that accused persons with intention to commit murder made straight fires at the son of the complainant that hit him on his both legs below knees; as such, they are not entitled for the concession of bail.
5. The learned DPG appearing for the State, while adopting the arguments of learned counsel for the complainant, has also opposed the grant of bail to applicants.
6. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants/accused, learned counsel for the complainant and learned DPG as well as perused the material available on record.
7. It appears that the alleged incident took place on 02.10.2016 at 1300 hrs. while the FIR was lodged on 03.10.2016 at 2300 hrs, with delay of 34 hrs., for which complainant has furnished the explanation that he was busy in treatment of his son, that may be plausible explanation but element of consultation and deliberation cannot be ruled out looking to the fact that all the male members of the one and same family have been implicated in this case. The applicants/accused are in custody since 16.10.2016 and their trial has yet not been concluded by the trial Court. Enmity between the parties is also an admitted fact. Injuries allegedly sustained by the injured P.W. have been declared by the M.L.O. as Shajjah-i-hashimah, Ghayr-jaifah hashimah and Ghayrjaifah damiyah, which are punishable under sections 337-A(iii), 337-F(v) and 337-A(i) , P.P.C. for imprisonment up to ten, five and one year as ta'zir, respectively. As per MLR injuries Shajjah-i- hashimah and Ghayrjaifah hashimah have been caused by sharp cutting and hard blunt substances, which injuries as per the facts of FIR cannot be attributed to present accused. While two injuries allegedly caused by firearms have been declared as Ghayr-jaifah damiyah which, being punishable for one year under section 337-A(i), P.P.C., is bailable under the schedule of offences. Had it been intention of applicants/accused to kill the son of complainant then there would have been shooting at vital parts of his body, which was not done; thus, it is yet to be seen if the applicants/ accused had any intention to kill the injured PW, as such, application of section 324, P.P.C. could only be determined at trial; hence, the case of the applicants/accused squarely falls within the ambit of further enquiry as envisaged under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
8. Under the circumstances, applicants/accused are admitted to post-arrest bail subject to their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
9. Needless to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the trial Court while deciding the case of the applicants/accused on merits. In case the applicants/accused in any manner try to misuse the concession of bail, it would be open for the trial Court to cancel their bail after issuing them the requisite notice.