' Muhammad Ishfaq and Muhammad Mushtaq petitioners have filed this petition under section 497/498, Cr.P.C. For the grant of bail after arrest being accused in case F.I.R. No,155, dated 12-8-1994 registered under section 302/148/149, P.P.C. With Police Station Pull Ghiara Tehsil and District Sargodha.
2. Briefly the facts of the case are that on 12-8-1994 at 7-00 p.m. Muhammad Boota son of Mehr Din, Muhammad Mushtaq son of Muhammad Din, residents of Chak No,112/SB were sitting in the Bazar in front of their Bethak. Mst. Hamidah Bibi the mother and Mst. Sultan Bibi, the sister of the complainant passed by that way. Muhammad Boota and Muhammad Musthaq raised a Lalkara that they would remove away Mst. Sultana forcibly as she was engaged to Muhammad Boota. The mother of the complainant had scolded them. At that moment Muhammad Mushtaq son of Talib Hussain husband of complainant's sister reached there and asked Muhammad Boota etc. Not to disgrace the ladies and took them (ladies) to his house. At about 7-15 p.m. Muhammad Mushtaq armed with pistol, Muhammad Arshad armed with .12 bore gun, Muhammad Ashraf armed with .12 bore gun, Muhammad Ishaq armed with Sota and Muhammad Boota armed with Sota emerged in front of the house of Muhammad Mushtaq, the husband of the complainant's sister and challenged him to come out of his house. In the meantime the complainant Muhammad Ishtiaq and his sister's husband Muhammad Mushtaq, Muhammad Aslam son of Kaley Khan, Muhammad Anwar son of Muhammad Akbar had come out of their houses. When Muhammad Arshad had fired at Muhammad Aslam with his .12 bore gun that fire had hit on the left flank of Muhammad Aslam.
Muhammad Ashraf made a fire with .12 bore gun at Mushtaq hitting on his chest. On receiving that injury Muhammad Musthaq had fallen on the ground and when he was lying on the ground Muhammad Arshad had made fire with his gun hitting on his chest. The co-accused Muhammad Musthaq and Muhammad Ashraf had made fires with their pistols and guns respectively but those fires had gone missed. In the meantime Muhammad Akram, Muhammad Siddique, Asghar Ali had reached there on seeing the occurrence. The accused Muhammad Boota had given a blow with his Sota on the left side of head of Muhammad Akram. The present petitioner Muhammad Mushtaq had given a blow with the "butt" of his revolver on the right cheek of Muhammad Siddique. The present petitioner Muhammad Ishfaq had given a Sota blow on the left elbow of Asghar Ali. The co- accused Muhammad Boota had given a Sota blow on the left arm of Asghar Ali. In this occurrence Muhammad Mushtaq son of Talib Hussain and Muhammad Aslam son of Kalay Khan had received fatal injuries and had succumbed to those injuries cm the spot.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners have caused no injury to the deceased and that the alleged injuries on the person of Muhammd Siddique P.W. With blunt weapons are simple in nature. Further, contended that Muhammad Ishfaq petitioner was injured in the occurrence and received as many as 22 injuries on his person which have not been explained by the complainant. According to learned counsel Muhammad Mushtaq also received injuries and that it has been found during the investigation by D.S.P., C.IA. That he was not armed with pistol and was empty-handed. Learned counsel argued that no recovery has been effected from the petitioners and the case of petitioners is one of further inquiry.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the petition while adopting the reasons given by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.
5. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.
6. It is an admitted fact that the present petitioners have caused no injury to the deceased persons.
The only allegation against them is that they had inflicted injuries upon Asghar Ali and Muhammad Siddique with their respective weapons. Learned counsel for the State was unable to rebut the plea that any weapon of offence has been recovered from the present petitioners. No specific rote has been ascribed to them. During the scuffle, Muhammad Ishfaq petitioner received as many as 22 injuries on his person while Muhammad Mushtaq received two injuries on his person. The complainant party has suppressed the fact regarding injuries to the accused persons. It appears that whole family of the accused persons have been involved to widen the net. In these circumstances, I am of the view that the case of the petitioners falls under proviso (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Resultantly, the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Sargodha.