Having failed to get post arrest bail in case FIR No. 155 dated 11.04.2018, registered under Sections 324, 34, 337- F(iii), 337-F(v) and 458, PPC at Police Station, Kundian, District Mianwali from the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Piplan vide order dated 08.04.2019 the petitioner has prayed the same relief through the instant petition.
2. Precisely , allegation against the accused/petitioner Nasir Mehmood @ Nasira son of Rabnawaz is that he along with other accused persons while armed with their respective weapons fired a straight fire upon the injured, hence the instant case.
3. Pro and contra arguments heard. Record perused.
4. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the record, it evinces that although the petitioner is nominated in the FIR with a role of firing on person of injured namely , Sher Akmal but the main role is attributed to his co-accused Inam Ullah who made a straight fire upon person of Sher Akmal resultantly he sustained injury whereas present petitioner was also attributed firing on his person but it has not been specifically mentioned whether the fires made by the petitioner hit the injured or not. Inam Ullah and Sher Akmal co-accused are real cousin and motive is also against said Inam Ullah and the petitioner has no concern at all with either party and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner vigorously argued that the petitioner has been involved in the instant case due to friendship with co-accused Inam Ullah. The petitioner has been arrested in the instant case on 04.05.2018 and allegedly recovery of Pistol has been affected from his possession but no matching report with the crime empty allegedly secured from the place of occurrence by the Investigating Officer is available. The petitioner is behind the bars for about more than 14 months and despite the fact that charge had been framed way back on 21.04.2018 but not a single witness has been recorded so far as PWs are not appearing before the learned trial Court despite issuance of repeated summonses and warrants by the learned trial. Court.
5. Keeping in view the above circumstances, the continuous detention of the petitioner is not likely to serve any purpose for the prosecution. Even otherw ise, there are sufficient reasons to believe that the case of the petitioner calls further probe into his guilt within the scope of Section 497(2), Cr.P.C. and petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (rupees two lacs) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.