This is an application for bail on behalf of Des petitioner in a ease under section 302/148/149, P.P.C registered at Police Station, Hujra Shah Moqeem vide F. I. R. No. 160/81, dated 2nd August, 1981.
2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner with seven others in furtherance of their common object caused the death of Noor Samand and injuries to six prosecution witnesses on 2nd August, 1981, at 10-30 a. m.
3. As far the petitioner, it has been alleged that he was armed with a hatchet and caused one hatchet blow on the head of the deceased and also injuries to Sana-Ullah and Aziz P. Ws. With his hatchet.
4. It appears that both sides have received injuries during the occur--rence. On the side of the prosecution Noor Samand deceased received four injuries all caused with blunt weapon. Faiz P. W.
Received seven injuries caused with blunt weapon all simple in nature, Sana-Ullah P. W. Received ten injuries, two with sharp-edged weapon and the others with blunt weapon, out of these injuries two caused with blunt weapon, have been declared grievous, Muhammad Aslam received eight injuries, one by sharp-edged weapon and the remaining with blunt weapon all simple in nature.
Aziz P. W. Received eighteen injuries, two with sharp-edged weapon and all simple in nature.
Muhammad Ali P. W. Received one injury caused with blunt weapon, grievous in nature, Muhammad Siddique P. W. Received five injuries caused with blunt weapon simple in nature. On the other side Anayat co-accused received 14 injuries, four with sharp-edged weapon and ten with blunt weapon out of these injuries one injury caused with sharp-edged weapon has been declared grievous, Jahangir received five injuries one with sharp-edged and four with blunt weapon all simple in nature. Fateh Muhammad received one blunt weapon injury grievous in nature, Noor Muhammad received three injuries with sharp-edged weapon the remaining with blunt weapon, all simple in nature.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there are cross-cases and it is yet to be decided as to which party was the aggressor one and that the part attributed to the petitioner is belied by the medical evidence. As against this, the learned State counsel assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has seriously opposed this application. The learned counsel for the complainant has contended that the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the part attributed to the petitioner stands belied by the medical evidence needs deeper apprecia--tion which is neither permissible nor desirable at this stage. He further contends that the mere fact that there are cross-cases is not a good ground for the grant of bail.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties I find (i) that there are cross-cases, (ii) that- on the side of the accused four persons received 23 injuries caused with sharp and blunt weapons ; out of these injuries two have been declared grievous ; (iii) that the counter case, i. e. F. I. R. No. 165/80 has also been challaned ; (iv) that no injury caused with sharp-edged weapon was found on the person of the deceased. The grievous injuries found on the person of Sana-Ullah are caused with blunt weapon and the injuries found on the person of Aziz P. W. Are simple A in nature.
7. Without making any expression of opinion lest it may prejudice the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the question of the vicarious liability of Des petitioner requires further inquiry- He is allowed bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 20,000 (Rs. Twenty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate, Sahiwal.
M.Y.HBall granted.