The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered against Mansha etc. Vide F.I.R. No. 135, dated 6-6-1994 for an offence under sections 337-H-ii and 337-F-i, at P.S. Barrana, District Jhang.
2. According to the allegations made in the FIR, Mansha who was armed with iron rod inflicted 7 injuries to the petitioner including a grievous one on the right arm which was fractured. After about 6 days, counter-version of Mansha was recorded. He alleged that, in fact, he was attacked by the petitioner alongwith her son named Waris and caused 6 injuries to him with a blunt weapon.
3. The petitioner's learned counsel contends that the injuries attributed to the petitioner are simple and fall in the category of Shajja Khafeefa, covered under section 337-A- which is bailable being punishable with 2 years' imprisonment. He adds that the other injury on the head of Mansha was attributed to Waris son of the petitioner who has already been granted bail before arrest by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide his order dated 22-9-1994. He also submits that there are two versions about the same occurrence and at this stage it cannot be said with certainty as to which one is true. Lastly, he submits that the petitioner is a woman and her case is covered by the first proviso to section 497 of Cr.P.C. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State and the complainant submit that the petitioner inflicted as many as 8 injuries to Mansha with Danda who narrowly escaped death. They add that the petitioner had disappeared after dismissal of her petition for pre---arrest bail by the learned Sessions Judge and is not entitled to concession of bail.
4. Admittedly, there are two versions of the same occurrence and at this stage, it cannot be said with any amount of certainty as to which one is true. The petitioner is a woman who was also injured in the occurrence and her right arm was fractured. Her case is covered by the first proviso to section 497 of the Cr.P.C. And she deserves concession of bail even without showing mala fides on the part of the police in the matter of her intended arrest. All the other accused involved in the case have been allowed bail by the Court below.
S. For the foregoing reasons, the petition is accepted and the interim pre-arrest bail already allowed to the-petitioner vide order dated 10-10-1994 is confirmed.