' This is a petition under section 497(5), Cr.P.C. By Nazir Ahmad, petitioner/complainant, for the cancellation of bails granted to Siddique, Noor and Dil Muhammad, accused/respondents Nos. 1 to 3, by an Additional Sessions Judge of Gujranwala on 20-6-1984 and 8-7-1984.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that the accused party wanted to usurp the turn of water available to Nazir Ahmad, complainant. Accordingly, the accused party, duly armed with hatchets, Dangs and an iron pipe, attacked the complainant party, mortally killing Muhammad Siddique, deceased, and injuring Ghulam Muhammad and Nazir P.Ws. Faqir Muhammad, Idris and Munshi Khan, co-accused, are alleged to have injured Muhammad Siddique, deceased, with their hatchet, Dang and hatchet respectively, whereas Siddique, Noor and Dil. Muhammad respondents are alleged to have injured Ghulam Muhammad and Nazir P.Ws. With their Dang, Sota and iron pipe respectively. It is alleged in the F.I.R. That in self-defence, the complainant party also injured Faqir Muhammad and Idrees, co-accused. The investigation has revealed that Dil Muhammad accused/respondent No,3, also received injuries in the same occurrence.
3. On behalf of the petitioner/complainant it is submitted that all the six accused are liable under section 149, P.P.C. And that the three accused/respondents Nos.1 to 3 having injured Ghulam Muhammad and Nazir P.Ws. With their Dangs and iron pipe, were not entitled to be released on bail.
It is further submitted that the challan has also been filed in Court against all the six accused persons and that the three accused/respondents also led to the recoveries of weapons of offence.
4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the accused/respondents and the State. The dispute appears to be over the turn of water; otherwise, no past enmity of any serious nature is alleged in the F.I.R. On the side of the complainant, Muhammad Siddique, deceased, received six injuries, Ghulam Muhammad P.W. Six injuries and complainant Nazir P.W.
One injury. On the side of accused party, Dil Muhammad, accused/respondent No,3, received three injuries, Faqir Muhammad, co-accused, received four injuries, and Idrees, co-accused, received seven injuries. The accused/respondents are not alleged to have injured Muhammad Siddique, deceased. It yet remains to be examined whether the occurrence was not a sudden fight. Taking all circumstances into consideration, the orders of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, dated 20-6- 1984 and 8-7-1984 granting bail to the accused/respondents Nos. 1 to 3 do not appear to be either illegal or perverse. There is no merit in this petition. The same is dismissed.