ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA J.--These two petitions are proposed to be disposed of together by this consolidated order as they relate to two accused in the same case. Petitioner Rashid Khan (Criminal petition No. 3-P of 1986) and respondent No.1 Mir Nawaz (Criminal Petition No.4-P of 1986), alongwith Muhammad Nawaz and Lal Nawaz are facing trial under section 302/307/34, P.P.C. For the murder of Akhtar Nawaz son of Nek Nawaz and for attempt on the life of Nek Nawaz and others.
The application for the release of Rashid Khan was dismissed by the Magistrate First Class, Karak, on 16th September, 1985. Similarly Mir Nawaz also applied for bail but his request was also turned down. Both accused then approached the Additional Sessions Judge Karak, for their release but their applications were dismissed.
2. They, therefore, applied for the grant of bail in the Peshawar High Court. The learned Single Judge who heard the bail application of the two accused, after referring Mir Nawaz to the medical board and obtaining their medical opinion came to the conclusion that he was entitled to bail. According to the opinion of the medical board Mir Nawaz was of 70 years of age and had defective vision in his right eye and his left eye vision only extended to perception of light. So far Rashid Khan is concerned, the learned single Judge found that prima facie he was attributed role in the participation of the crime, in that, he had fired at the complainant party although without damage to any one. As a result of these conclusions, the learned single Judge by his order, dated 11th January, 1986 admitted to bail respondent No.1 Mir Nawaz (Criminal Petition No.4-P/1986) and dismissed the application for bail in respect of petitioner Rashid Khan (Criminal Petition No.3- P/1986).
3. Petitioner Rashid Khan has brought this petition for leave to appeal from the order of the High Court for his release on bail and complainant Nek Nawaz has brought petition for leave to appeal to challenge the order of the High Court granting bail to respondent Mir Nawaz.
4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners and examined the order passed by the High Court ands subordinate Courts. The main ground urged on behalf of Rashid Khan by his learned counsel is that he has been attributed ineffective firing and, therefore, his is a case of further inquiry. As regards Mir Nawaz a has been urged on behalf of the complainant that mere old age is n ground for grant of bail.
5. After hearing the learned counsel at length, we find no force in the argument of either side. The High Court in the exercise of its discretion has not violated any principles of law or committed any other illegality. We find no justification to interfere with the order of the High Court and refuse leave in both petitions.