1. ANWARUL HAQ, J.---Cross crises ate pending between the parties. On the side of the petitioners,, a first information, report was lodged on the 25th of December 1974, regarding the death of one Said Rasul whereas the complainant Muhammad Khan who has appealed in person before us, made his report the next day on the 26th ofDecember 1974, under section 307, P. P. C., when the Investigating Officer arrived at the spot in connection with the earlier F. I. R. Lodged by the petitioners. Muhammad Khan alleged. That the petitioners hail injured three members of his side, namely, Sarfraz Khan, Rasul Khan and Zamurrad Khan. The learned Additional sessions Judge, Campbell far, allowed bail to some members of the opposing factions. His orders were challenged by the parties before the High Court, but they were maintained bar a learned Judge by his or4er doted 21-7-1975.
2. After hearing the parties we have decided to convert this petition into an appeal and to dispose, it of accordingly.
3. We find that the allegations against the appellants were not made until about 24 hours after the alleged, incident, when the Investigating Officer bird come to site in connection with the F. I. R.
4. Registered on behalf of the appellants relating to, the death of their companion Said Rasul. The first informant Muhammad Khan tried, to explain this delay by saying that he and his companions were surround in the village by the appellants and, therefore, be could not make the necessary report on the 25th of December 1974. We do not wish to comment on the merits of the submission but the fact remains that the information against the appellants was considerably delayed. We also find that there has been one fatal casualty on the side of the appellants, whereas on the opposite side no such unfortunate consequences ensured. The question as to which party was the aggressor has still to bit determined. However; even the inquiry proceedings have not yet commenced in spice of the lapse - of nearly one year since the incident.
5. Considering all these circumstances, we would confirm the order of interim bail made in favour of the appellants by is Count on the l0th of October 1975. The appeal is accepted accordingly.