ORDER ' case F.I.R. No,392 was registered under section 302/324/34, P.P.C. At Police Station Bantu at the instance of one Muhammad Salheen on 24th of December, 1995, at 8-30 p.m. Against three persons namely Muhammad Ali armed with Chhuri, Muhammad Shafiq alias Raja and Ibrar Hussain Ahmed armed with pistol each.
2. According to the contents of the F.I.R., in this case two persons were done to death and four persons were injured at the hands of the accused/assailants. The deceased in this case are Karamat Hussain and Muhammad Khalil. The fatal injury suffered by Karamat Hussain deceased was attributed to Muhammad Shafiq alias Raja whereas grievous injury suffered by Muhammad Khalil deceased was attributed to Ibrar Hussain. As far as the present petitioner is concerned, he was attributed a Chhuri blow on the neck of Umran P.W. Who came forward to rescue the complainant party from the assailants. The motive for the alleged commission of crime is stated to be that the accused party dealt in narcotics which was objected to by the complainant party as a result of which the aforesaid incident took place.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks bail on the grounds that the petitioner has been falsely involved in this case; that there is a cross-version and a writ petition was filed in the High Court for a direction to the police for recording the version of the petitioner's party; that the present petitioner also suffered a grievous injury on his abdomen in the alleged occurrence and he remained admitted in the hospital for a sufficient long time; that the complainant's party suppressed this fact which shows that they were the aggressors. Lastly, learned counsel contends that since only one simple injury is attributed to the petitioner on a person of a P.W., hence he is entitled to bail in the given circumstances.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel has opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that it is a case of double murder and some persons were injured; that the accused came from a different place probably from a distance one and a half kilometers and they were armed with lethal weapons with which they committed the alleged crime, then as far as the present petitioner is concerned, he was in their company and he allegedly caused a Chhuri blow on the neck of Umran P.W., who came, forward to rescue the complainant's party from the assault of the accused; that the petitioner was also challaned in the hurt case some time back in which he was on bail. At this moment, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the facts are not properly narrated. According to him, the real fact is that Ibrar Hussain was fired at by Muhammad Shafiq alias Raja and the matter was reported by the present petitioner against him. Learned State Counsel has further stated that later on, the present petitioner was married to the niece of Muhammad Shafiq alias Raja and now they are closely related inter se. Therefore, the sharing of common intention is there; that this occurrence was witnessed by number of persons and the presence of the petitioner was not denied by the other side; that the recovery of Chhuri has been affected from the petitioner which was found blood-stained and sent to the Chemical Examiner.
Hence the petitioner is not entitled to bail.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the record and also gone through the medico-legal reports. Regarding the injury sustained by the present petitioner, the Investigating Officer referred the matter for inquiry to the doctor who gave a different opinion which was altogether different from his earlier opener. According to the Investigating Officer, this injury was concocted which fact was also supported as per evidence on the police file. It is a case of double murder in which all the accused came forward together from a far off place. They were armed with lethal weapons and they effectively used the same in committing the murder of two persons and caused injuries to four persons. The motive for the commission of this crime is also stated in the F.I.R. So far, the petitioner has not filed any private complaint in respect of his injury in any Court as a cross-version. After filing the private complaint, if so advised, the accused/petitioner can again apply for the grant of bail to him. But at this I stage, he is not entitled to bail. Consequently, his bail petition stands dismissed.