This order will dispose of two bail petitions, Cr.M.744/B of 1986 filed by Muhammad Ilyas, petitioner, and Cr. M. 870/B of 1986 filed by Sarwar, petitioner, in respect of a case instituted against them and six others under section 302/307/148/149, P.P.C. At Police Station Jaranwala, District Faisalabad, on 29-8-1985.
2. The allegations against Muhammad Ilays and Sarwar, petitioners, are that they, in furtherance of their common intention alongwith their co-accused, namely, Shaukat, Anwar son of Farzand Ali, Anwar son of Sarwar Khan, Niamat, Sher Muhammad and Afzal Khan, armed with deadly weapons, committed the murder of Abdul Wahid. Deceased, and made murderous assault on Ghulam Sabir, Nazir and Mst. Ghulam Fatima, injured P.Ws. The occurrence is divided into two parts. The first part of the occurrence took place at 5-00 p.m. On 29-8-1985 and in that occurrence, Muhammad Ilyas, petitioner, and Anwar s/o Sarwar, co-accused, are said to be armed with daggers, Niamat and Sher Muhammad, co-accused, are said to be armed with hatchets, Sarwar, petitioner, was armed with a Datter, Afzal, co-accused was armed with a carbine and Anwar son of Farzand Ali, co- accused, was armed with a gun. According to the prosecution story, Muhammad Ilyas, petitioner, and Anwar son of Sarwar, co-accused, inflicted injuries with their respective weapons to Ghulam Sabir, which hit on his neck and on his one hand, after Sarwar, petitioner, had held him in his Japha.
Niamat, co-accused, is attributed to have injured Nazir Ahmad P.W. By using his hatchet from wrong side. Similarly, Sher Muhammad, co-accused, is also attributed to have injured Nazir Ahmad by using hatchet from wrong side. The allegation against Afzal, co-accused, is that he fired ineffectively with his carbine. In the second part of the occurrence, it is alleged that Shaukat and Anwar son of Farzand Ali, co-accused while armed with guns, Sarwar, petitioner, armed with a Datter (sickle) and Afzal, co-accused, armed with a carbine, on the same day at 6.00 p.m. Came to the Baithak of complainant where Abdul Wahid, deceased, and Mst. Ghulam Fatima were sitting. In this occurrence, Shaukat co-accused is said to have fired at Abdul Wahid, deceased, which hit him on his chest. Similarly, Anwar, co-accused, is also said to have fired, which shot also hit the chest of the deceased. The allegation against Sarwar, petitioner, is that he raised Lalkara and that against Afzal, co-accused, is that he inflicted injury with the butt end of his carbine to Mat. Ghulam Fatima, injured P.W., which hit her on her forehead. Afzal, co-accused, also fired ineffectively.
3. The motive was political rivalry between both the parties, as the complainant party supported Ghulam Dastgir Bari in the election to the National Assembly seat, whereas the accused party supported Muhammad Azhar Khan. They were on strained relations and due to this grievance, the accused party committed this occurrence. First occurrence was witnessed by Abdul Ghafoor and Ijaz P.Ws., beside the injured P.Ws., whereas the second occurrence was witnessed by Rehmat and Khurshid Anwar. The first occurrence took place in the fields at 5.00 p.m. And the second occurrence took place on the same day at 6.00 p.m- in the village.
4. On behalf of Muhammad Ilyas, petitioner, it is submitted that he alongwith one Anwar inflicted, three sharp-edged injuries on Ghulam Sabir P.W., two of which were on the neck and one on the hand, and it cannot be definitely stated which of the injuries on the neck were inflicted by Muhammad Ilyas, petitioner. As regards Sarwar, petitioner, it is submitted that he is only attributed Japha in the first occurrence and Lalkara in the second.
5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the State and have also perused the record. There are three sharp edged injuries on Ghulam Sabir P.W., two of which are stab wounds on the neck going deep on back of neck. In these circumstances, Muhammad Ilyas, petitioner, is not entitled to be released on bail. With regard to Sarwar, petitioner, he is only alleged to have held Ghulam Sabir P.W. In his Japha in the first occurrence, but injuries on his neck and hand militate against this position. Further, Sarwar, petitioner, is only attributed a Lalkara in the second occurrence. Without going on the record as having given any finding in the matter, I would only say, for the limited purpose of this petition, that Sarwar, petitioner, is entitled to be released on bail.
6. For the foregoing reasons, the bail petition (Cr. M. 74/B of 1986) filed by Muhammad Ilyas, petitioner, is dismissed whereas the bail petition (Cr.M.870/B of 1986) filed by Sarwar, petitioner, is accepted. Sarwar, petitioner, is released on bail, subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rupees thirty thousand (Rs.30,000) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Jaranwala.