The petitioners seek bail, in case F.
1. R. No. 110, Police Station Pasrur, dated 5-8-1982, recorded at 12.0 (night) on the statement of Muzaffar Iqbal recorded at 12.30 (night) by A.S.I in the hospital. The occurrence'-is stated to have taken place at 8.30 p.m. On 4-8-1982.
2. Briefly, it is alleged that Shamsher Ali petitioner had a dispute with Abdul Sattar injured in the Canal Office over getting some contracts and Shamsher Ali had threatened him that he will not allow him to earn his liveli--hood by getting contracts from the Irrigation Department. It is stated in the F. I. R. That on the day of occurrence at 8.30 p.m. When the complainant's brother, Abdul Sattar, was returning from his tube-well, ha was attacked by petitioners Shamsher Ali, Gulzar Ahmad, armed with chhuris, Dildar Ali and Muhammad Yaqub, armed with Kulharis and one Muhammad Ayub, armed with a lathi. Shamsher Ali is alleged to have given a chhuri blow on the forehead of Abdul Sattar while Dildar Ali petitioner gave a kulhari blow on his light arm. Gulzar Ahmad also caused injury with his chhuri on the thumb of the left hand. Muhammad Yaqub petitioner struck a blow with his kulhari, which injured middle finger of the left hand. Blunt weapon injuries were caused by Muhammad Ayub, co-accused, who is not the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioners have contended that Dildar Eli petitioner was also found to have suffered two injuries but no explanation of these, injuries has been given in the F. I. R. And that out of the ten injuries ffcit4a'to`have been suffered by Abdul Sattar only injury No. 4, on the right arm, was declared grievous after X-ray examination while the rest of the injuries both caused by blunt weapon as well as by sharp-edged weapon, were declared simple. It is argued that in view of the nature of injuries, other than injury No. 4, no intention of murderous assault appears against the petitioners other than Dildar Ali.
4. I have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the F. I. R. And the order of the lower Court. Clear motive has been alleged against Shamsher Ali petitioner. The injury said to have been inflicted by him is also on the vital part, i.e. Forehead. Even though it has been declared to be simple, but in view of the fact that the same was caused on the forehead of Abdul Sattar, it cannot be adjudged at this moment that Shamsher Ali had no intention to launch a murderous assault. The injury ascribed to Dildar Ali petitioner is grievous. As such, no case for bail qua them is made out. Their prayer for bail is rejected.
5. So far as Gulzar Ahmad and Muhammad Yaqub petitioners are concerned the injuries caused by them are simple and the dimensions of the injuries are also significantly smaller. Form the facts enumerated above, no intention of murderous assault appears against them. They shall be released on bail provided they furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 20,000 each, with one surety each, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Pasrur.