' This order will dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous No,3730/B of 1994 and Criminal Miscellaneous No,4111/B of 1994 since they are applications for bail in respect of accused persons who have been arrested in respect of the same F.I.R. No,314/94, dated 15-5-1994 registered at Police Station Sadar, Sheikhupura.
2. According to the facts, as stated in the F.I.R. Which was registered at the instance of Muhammad Ali, A.S.I., Police Station Saddar, Sheikhupura, two parties armed with fire-arms comprising of more than twelve persons on each side, fired indiscriminately on each other on 15-5-1994. The police on learning of the occurrence arrived at the spot and registered the said F.I.R., in which twelve persons have been named from each side and it has further been mentioned that they were accompanied with several other unknown persons from each side. During the course of investigation both the parties named the persons whose names appear in the F.I.R. And both parties gave statements on oath before the Investigating Officer, after which four persons from the Dogarparty were found guilty by the Investigating Officer and five persons from the Butt-party were found to be guilty by the Investigating Officer. Eight of these persons were arrested by the police and one of them is still at large. None of those persons named in the F.I.R. Was arrested because they were not found guilty during the investigation. The Investigating Officer Rana Muhammad Iqbal has stated that the investigation of this case has been completed and the challan has been submitted before the Court.
3. In Criminal Miscellaneous No,3730-B of 1994 the petitioners are Muhammad Yunus, Muhammad Rafiq and Humayun. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners were victims of aggression since they had purchased land measuring ten and a half acres for the price of Rs,20,00,000 and had taken lawful possession of the same and they were attacked by the opposing party who had been previous lessees in respect of the same land. They attacked in an effort to illegally resume possession of the same land. It is submitted that only ineffective firing is attributed to the petitioners. The F.I.R. Has been lodged after prior consultation. The petitioners are the victims of aggression and are previously with clean record. One member of their party has been killed during the occurrence and no identification of any of the accused persons was made by the Investigating Officer.
' In criminal Miscellaneous No,4111-B of 1994 the petitioners are Irshad Ali, Amanat Ali, Shaukat Ali and Mukhtar Ahmad. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Mukhtar Ahmad petitioner was the lessee of the land in question and he was in lawful possession of the land and there was a litigation pending between the parties in a Civil Court and status quo had been ordered in favour of Mukhtar Ahmad petitioner in respect of possession of the land. The opposing party, i,e, Butt Party, was the aggressor. The petitioners were victims of aggression. They retaliated in self-defence. No injury has been attributed to any of them and they are already incarcerated for five months.
4. I have heard both learned counsel for the parties as well as learned counsel for the State and also the Investigating Officer in the case. The learned counsel for the State has submitted that in this case there are counter-versions of the occurrence which is admittedly a free fight over a dispute of land in respect of which both parties claim to be lawfully in possession. Each party claims to be the victim of aggression and each party claims to have fired in self-defence. The petitioners in Criminal Miscellaneous No,3730/B of 1994 have submitted that since one member of their party has been murdered it establishes the fact that they are the victims of aggression and the deceased is named in the F.I.R. The learned counsel for the petitioners in Criminal Miscellaneous No,4111-B of 1994 also submits that one of the members of their party has been killed.
The learned Additional Sessions Judge has refused bail in the bail applications filed by both the parties on the ground that both parties have resorted to indiscriminate firing and during the course of investigation the petitioners in both the petitions have been found guilty of committing murderous assault against each other.
5. I find that there is a serious dispute between the parties, in which there has been indiscriminate firing at each other and subsequent loss of valuable lives. The investigation has been completed and challan has been submitted for trial before the Court. It will not be appropriate to release the petitioners in either of these bail petitions at this stage since it may lead to further complications.
Both the criminal miscellaneous applications are dismissed.
6. The trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial and conclude it as early as possible.