' Through an F.I.R. Bearing No,158 dated 15-6-1988 of Police Station Bhalwal recorded for the alleged commission of offences punishable under section 307/34/109, P.P.C., Bati complainant had alleged that at about 7-00 a.m., that morning, he and his nephew Ghulam Hussain (injured victim of the occurrence) had been waylaid by Ijaz petitioner who was armed with a .12 bore carbine and by his companion Nazir who was empty-handed.
2. Nazir accused was alleged to have held the said Ghulam Hussain in 'Japha' after raising a Lalkara whereafter Ijaz petitioner was stated to have fired at this victim which hit him in the lower part of his abdomen.
3. When this injured Ghulam Hussain reached the hospital at 8-15 a.m., the doctor found him in a state of deep coma. He was pale, pulseless and blood pressure less. He had a fire-arm wound on the front and left side of his lower abdomen, 2 c.m. Above the root of penis and this injury was 13 c.m. x 9 c.m. x abdominal cavity deep with inverted edges and with blackening all around it.
4. Six holes of exit with everted edges in an area of 8 c.m. x 7 c.m. Were found on the inner part of left thigh.
5. A piece of wad was recovered from the left testicle which testicle was found smashed as per the operation notes of the Medical Superintendent of Tehsil Headquarter's Hospital of Bhalwal.
6. The penis had a muscle deep laceration 7 c.m. x 2 c.m. On its left lateral aspect.
7. The injury was reported to have been caused by a fire-arm and was declared grievous.
8. Having been arrested on 18-6-1988, the petitioner sought his release on bail from the Court of the learned trial Magistrate vide his application dated 17-9-1988.
9. This application was dismissed by Mr. Zafar Sultan, Civil Judge/Magistrate Section 30, Bhalwal on 27-9-1988 after having observed as under:- ' The injury attributed to Ijaz Ahmad petitioner has been declared grievous and is also on the vital part of the body. As such Ijaz Ahmad is not entitled to the concession of hail."
10. Within eighteen days of the dismissal of this bail application, a fresh application was made by Ijaz petitioner, before the learned Court praying, once again, for his release on bail.
11. This time, through an order dated 31-10-1988, the learned Magistrate obliged him after holding that:- "The other co-accused in this case have already been enlarged on bail. The petitioner is in the judicial lock-up from the last about 5 months and the trial has not yet commenced. Though the injury attributed to the petitioner is grievous but is not declared dangerous to the life. As there is no likelihood of the conclusion of the trial at an early stage and the petitioner is not a previous convict therefore in my opinion now he is entitled to the concession of hail."
12. Bati complainant moved the learned Sessions Court for the cancellation of this bail allowed to Ijaz petitioner.
13. This application for cancellation of bail was moved on 20-12-1988 in which a learned A.S.J.
(Mr.Mumtaz Munawar Khan Niazi) of Bhalwal summoned the record from the learned trial Court and having considered and pondered over the matter for full one year, finally decided to recall this bail through his order dated 5-12-1989.
14. The petitioner has now approached this Court for his release on hail.
15. The conduct of Mr. Muhammad Zafar Sultan, learned Civil Judge/Magistrate Section 30, Bhalwal, in the matter of grant of bail to Ijaz petitioner is, to say the least, shocking.
16. He had rejected Ijaz petitioner's prayer for hail on 27-9-1988 on the ground that the injury received by the victim of this petitioner was on a vital part of the body and was grievous in nature.
17. But within a month thereof, the tables appear to have got turned after it had dawned upon the same learned Presiding Officer that the injury in question had not been declared as dangerous to life; that the accused-petitioner was a previous non-convict and further that there was no likelihood of the trial in question concluding at an early stage. The observation of the learned Presiding Officer that the injury was not dangerous to ,life is an observation which lacks either in honesty or is in complete ignorance of the nature of the injury as described and reported by the doctor who had examined the victim of this aggression.
18. In any case, while dismissing the first bail application, these grounds which allegedly weighed with the learned Magistrate subsequently for the grant of bail to the petitioner, were not only available to the accused person but had even been considered by the learned Magistrate and rejected.
19. In the circumstances, the propriety of the learned Magistrate's conduct in re-considering the grounds already considered by him only to come to a different conclusion this time, is open to serious exception.
20. A word may also be said about the performance of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Mr. Mumtaz Munawar Khan Niazi, Additional Sessions .11. Dge, Bhalwal).
21. It .00k him full one year to decide a cancellation of bail petition.
22. This inordinate delay in the disposal of this matter, is not only scandalous but ever delayed the trial by one year because this learned Additional Sessions Judge had even summoned the judicial record from the learned trial Court.
23. The learned Additional Sessions Judge when called upon to explain this delay, has reported that the learned counsel for the parties had been seeking adjournments to argue the matter.
24. The learned counsel for the petitioner appearing before this Court seriously challenges this report of the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
25. Be that as it may, even if it be presumed that the learned Additional Sessions Judge was adjourning the disposal of this matter at the request of the learned counsel for the parties, the fact that he had left the regulation of the conduct of his Court to the mercy and the pleasure of the learned counsel appearing before him, is a conduct which must he deprecated.
26. A copy of this order shall be laid before my Lord, the Chief Justice for his Lordship's information and for such action against these two judicial officers as his Lordship may deem appropriate in the circumstances above-noticed.
27. So far as the petitioner's prayer for his release on bail is concerned, in view of the facts and the circumstances above-mentioned, I do not feel persuaded to exercise my discretion in his favour.
28. Consequently, this petition is dismissed.
29. Copies of this order shall also be sent to the two learned Presiding Officers, abovementioned, as also to the learned Sessions Judge of Sargodha.