' This is an application for bail in a case registered against the petitioners and another vide F.I.R.
No,217/82 with Police Station Midh Ranjha, District Sargodha on 15-12-1982.
2. Facts relevant for the disposal of this application are that the petitioners herein, namely, Ghulam Rasul., Muhammad Nazir, Ahmad and Ghulam Hussain who expired in Jail were accused of offences under sections 302, 307, 440, 148/149, P.P.C. For having formed themselves into an unlawful assembly while armed with a hatchet and sticks and in pursuance of the common object thereof caused death of one Muhammad Hayat.
3. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha, rejected bail application of the petitioners by order, dated 11-5-1983 on the ground that they were specifically named in the F.I.R., injuries were attributed to them and they were charged with the offence under section 302, P.P.C. Which is a heinous one.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that according to the F.I.R., the petitioners are not alleged to have caused any injury on the deceased Muhammad Hayat, but are alleged to have caused simple and grievous injuries to the P.Ws., therefore, their case stands on different footing than that of Ghulam Hussain who allegedly inflicted two hatchet injuries on the head of the deceased.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application. He submitted that Mukhtar Ahmed P.W. Received seven injuries at the hand of Ahmed petitioner who was armed with hatchet.
Muhammad Aslam P.W. Received four injuries with blunt weapon at the hand of Muhammad Nazir petitioner. Muhammad P.W. Received six injuries including one grievous injury at the hands of Ghulam Rasul petitioner. According to the F.I.R., the petitioners were members of an unlawful assembly. So prima facie they shared common intention of Ghulam Hussain accused who alleged to have caused the death of Muhammad Hayat, therefore, prima facie the petitioners are vicariously responsible for the offences charged and their case is covered by section 497(1), Cr.P.C.
6. I have perused the record and heard arguments of learned counsel for the parties.
7. During the course of occurrence Muhammad Nazir, as well as, Ghulam Rasul petitioners also suffered injuries. The prosecution has suppressed this fact in the F.I.R. Furthermore, it will be a serious question for consideration at the trial as to which party was in actual possession of the land where the occurrence took place and who was the aggressor, therefore, it is a case of further inquiry under section 497(2), Cr.P.C.
' In view of the above, the petitioners are granted bail in the sum of Rs,30,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Bhalwal, District Sargodha.