1. ' Three applicants are being tried for offence under section 302/34, P. P. C. It is the case of the prosecution that the applicants in furtherance of their common intention caused injuries to Bakar son of Muhammad Ali on 18th August, 1980 at 3-00 p. In. In front of the house of the deceased.
2. Applicant Bagh was armed with a wooden 'Patti' strip and Bakhshal had a Lathi. It is further stated that All Nawaz was empty-handed but he had call other two accused persons who gave blows with their weapons stated above to Bakar who fell down injured and became unconscious. It is also stated that the two accused persons who were armed with weapons also caused injuries to complainant Allahdino. The incident was witnessed by Mst. Hawa mother of the complainant and Lutufali. After the departure of accused persons Muhammad Paryal and other witnesses also came, who were apprised of the incident. Motive as stated in F. I. R. Is that about 5 or 6 days before the incident there was quarrel between the parties over the turn of water and on the day of incident complainant passed on bicycle in front of the house of accused persons where Alinavvaz was standing, who took objection on which there was exchange of abuses and in consequence thereof he called accused Bagh and Bakhshal who came armed and gave injuries to Bakar who had come out from his house which was nearby. Parties are interrelated. Bakar died in the hospital.
3. Report was lodged on the same date at 8-00 p.m. At police station Sobhoder when the distance between the police station and Sobhoder is 4 miles. Complainant has been medically examined for his injuries and has sustained simple injuries according to the doctor. There is counter-version also and accused Bagh lodged the report at the same police station on the same day about 45 minutes after the lodging of the report in the instant case which is registered in the Roznamcha as non-cognizable case. It is alleged by Bagh in his counter-report that on the day of incident Bakar had beaten his wife and when he came home he found his wife wounded and she complained that she has been beaten up by Bakar. Thereafter accused Bakhshal saw Allahdino and Bakar at about 3-0 p. m. In front of his house. It is admitted by Bagh that he had a wooden 'Patti' in his hand and his brother-in-law Bakhshal had a Lathi. He gave injuries to Allahdino complainant and Bakhshal gave injuries to Bakar who fell down. It is further stated that Allahdino complaisant gave Lathi blows to Bagh who also became injured and came for report. Injuries of Bagh are medically proved and doctor has given certificate that he has sustained three injuries which have been caused by blunt weapon, and have been declared to be simple in nature. It so appears that in the counter-version so many things are admitted such as place of occurrence, weapons, time of occurrence and causing of injuries. It is stated by the learned counsel for the applicants that it is a case of sudden fight and it is to be decided as to which party is aggressor. As such the case falls under section 497(2), Cr. P. C. For further inquiry. In support of this proposition he has cited 1980 SCM R 784.
4. ' It is also stated by the learned counsel for the applicants that in this case Lutufali eye-witness has sworn an affidavit in which he has not supported the prosecution case. Mashir Nazar Muhammad has also sworn an affidavit, which is produced before this Court in which it is stated that no recoveries were made in his presence. The learned counsel for the State on the other hand contends that Mst. Hawa, who is mother of the complainant is the natural witness and she still supports the prosecution case and the complainant who is injured in the attack is also supporting the prosecution case. Considering all these factors as stated above I am of the view that it is a case of further inquiry. As such the applicants are admitted to bail in the sum of Rs, 10,000 with one surety each and P. R. In the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. .