FAIAK SHER, J. - Post arrest bail is being sought in the case registered vide FIR No.254 of 25.8.1995 under Sections 302/324/337-A(i); 337-L/34 PPC at police station, Sadar Gojra District Toba Tek Singh alleging that around 2.30 p.m. While the deceased's son Iftikhar Ahmad was engaged in ploughing the fields comprising hectare No.3 in square 20 with a' tractor with the complainant and the deceased being around, suddenly the petitioner conjunctively with his father Muhammad Aslam, brother Ishtiaq Ahmad, paternal uncle Taj Din variously equipped emerged at the scene and responding to his father's exhortation the petitioner caused pistol shot firing landing at the deceased's abdomen below the chest whereupon he collapsed on the ground, subsequent whereto his accomplices belaboured the complainant with the butts of their weaponry, at which juncture co-villagers attracted to the scene poured in and rescued him from the assailants whereafter the deceased and the complainant were removed to Civil Hospital, Gojra where the former succumbed to the injuries the next, day, with a view to teaching the deceased a lesson for restraining the complainant's father from occupying the land in question despite the injunction ordered by the local Civil Court.
2. Contending that the land in question was leased into the petitioner's father by the deceased's brother Taj Din being co-owner thereof placing reliance on Khasra Girdawari pertaining to December 1995, from which the complainant side wanted to dispossess them in defence of person and property whereof responding to the complainant's firing the petitioner fired the fatal shot.
3. Which was controverted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant as well as the State submitting that the land in question was in active physical possession and under cultivation of the complainant, factum whereof stands duly vouched by the Register Haqdaran and Khasra Girdawari for the period in question of which the petitioner's side wanted to take forcible possession; resultantly, suit for permanent injunction was preferred tending to restrain them from interfering with their possession; wherein an injunctive order in the nature of status quo was delivered on 16.7.1996 in violation where of the invasion was launched; further non-recovery of any crime empty from the venue save for the one pertaining to the fatal shot ascribed to the petitioner repels the acclaimed plea of self-defence.
Which being borne out by the documents tendered at the rostrum, remained undislodged, prima facie constituting reasonable grounds for believing petitioner's involvement in the offence charged falling within the prohibition contemplated by Section 497(1) Cr.P.C, renders him disentitled to the sought for concession.
4. Consequently, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.