JUDGMENT MRS. FAKHAR-UN-NISA KHOKHAR, J.- This is a petition for bail after arrest in case FIR. No. 105/94 dated 21.5.1994 registered under sections 324/148/149 P.P.C, at Police Station Nishtar Colony, Lahore.
2. The bail petition of the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore vide order dated 21.7.1994 while the bail petition of Muhammad Arshad, co-accused of the petitioner, who was stated to be aged I6 years, according to the school leaving certificate, was accepted.
3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is only one injury attributed to the petitioner in the FIR which is stated to be 5 cm x 1 cm and this injury has not been repeated. The nature of the injury allegedly attributed to the petitioner attracts the provisions of S.337-A(ii) and not the provisions of S. 337-A(iii) of the Cr.P.C. The punishment in the former offence is five years which does not come within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. He further states that the rest of the accused are on bail, the rule of consistency applies to the present case.
4. On the other hand, this petition is opposed forcefully by the state counsel who submits that the injury No. 1 is a grievous injury and it is an incised would on the left cheek and nose 5 c.m. x 1 c.m.
Bone deep. The nature of the injury caused by the accused to the injured person attracts the provisions of S.337- A(iii) Cr.P.C, where the punishment is ten years. The accused does not deserve concession of bail.
5. I have heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the record. The petitioner is nominated in the FIR and injury No.1 is attributed to him which is an incised wound on the left cheek and nose 5 cm x 1 cm bone deep.
By inflicting this injury he has cut some part of the mouth and nose of the injured. No ulterior motive is shown by the prosecution to falsely involve the petitioner in this case and neither the petitioner can take benefit of further inquiry in this case nor any rule of consistency applies in this case.
6. In view of the above observation, I dismiss this petition having no merit.