Through this petition filed under Section 497, Cr.P.C., the petitioner namely Muhammad Ansar is seeking post- arrest bail in the case FIR No. 39 of 2019, dated 11.03.2019, registered at Police Station Ghazi Abad District Sahiwal, in respect of of fences under Sections 324, 337-F(iii), 452, and 34, PPC.
2. The allegation as against the petitioner , as culled from the evidentiary . material produced before the Court, is that the petitioner namely Muhammad Ansar fired at the person of the son of the complainant namely Muhammad Azhar ineffectively whereas, the petitioner again fired at the person of Mariyam Bibi which fire hit the right thigh of Mariyam Bibi, injured prosecution witness.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of this case with their able assistance.
4. It has been noticed by this Court that the injury attributed to the petitioner , her by the injured witness of the case namely Mariyam Bibi on her left thigh, was declared as "Jurh Ghayar-Jaifazh Mutalahimah", made punishable under 337-F (iii) and punishable for a term .which may extend to three years as tazir. A tentative perusal of the record shows that, prima facie, there is no sufficient material available on the record to believe that the petitioner has committed an Offence, which falls under the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the, Cr.P.C. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant of the case, has submitted that the contents of the FIR reveals that the petitioner had committed an offence under Section 324, PPC. Section 324 of the, PPC. deals with an attempt to commit qatl-i-amd. An attempt as an indictable crime means an intentional act with a view to attain a definite end but which is not achieved because of circumstance independent of the will of the-o ffender who makes the attempt.
In the instant case, the intention of the petitioner-to kill the complainant is not available, particularly when, after sustaining a injury , the injured namely Mst. Mariyam Bibi fell down and was entirely at the mercy of accused persons, but the petitioner despite having a firearm weapon, ceased to cause any other injury . Applicability of Section 324 of the, P.P.C. has to be adjudged in the background of number of the accused persons, the weapons carried by them and the opportunity available to them to complete the intended offence. Receipt of an injury on the thigh by the injured witness namely Mariyam Bibi has indicated that accused had no intention to kill her; otherwise he would have not chosen her thigh to inflict an injury . The applicability of Sectio n 324 of the, P.P.C. is yet to be determined during course of the trial and, at best, the case of the petitioner seems to be covered by the provisions of Section 337-F (iii) of the, P.P.C., which does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the, Cr.P.C. In the given circumstances, the case of petitioner falls within- the ambit of cases wher e grant of bail is a rule. Reliance is placed on the case of Jan Muhammad versus Haji Noor Jamal (1998 SCMR 500) wherein, it has been held as under: "In light of the provisions contained in Section 324, P.P.C. read with Section 337, P.P.C., we agree with the submissions made by the learned counse l for the petitioner . We agree with him that present case is not covered by the prohibition contained in subsection (1) of Section 497, Cr .P.C."
Besides, no exceptional circumstances appear in this case to withhold bail to the petitioners. The petitioner is behind the bars, since his arrest on 19.03.2019 and the investigation has been finalized, and the allegations against him are yet to be proved through evidence in the Court, as such, further detention of the petitioner in this case at this stage would not serve any fruitful purpose. Admittedly , the petitioner is a previous non-convict. The trial has not seen any fruitful progress as yet. It is settled that while dealing with the question of bail, Court should consider the minimum aspect of the sentence provided, for the alleged offence in the schedule. The prosecution has not produced any material to prove extraordinary and exceptional circumstances to refuse bail to the petitioner .
5. For the foregoing reasons the petition in hand is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 200,000/- (rupees two hundred thousand only) with two sureties each, in the like amount, to and satisfaction of learned trial Court,
6. Needless to mention that any observations made in the above order are tentative in nature and shall not influence the trial Court. Additionally a direction is issued to the learned trial Court to conclude the trial of the petitioner expeditiously , preferably within a period of four months from the receipt of copy of this order . It is made clear that if the petitioner or any person acting on his behalf causes delay in the conclusion of the trial then the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner in accordance with law .