' About the alleged murder of his son James Masih; Inayat Masih complainant got recorded F.I.R.
No,12, dated 23-4-1995 at Police Station Fateh Sher, Sahiwal under section 302/34, P.P.C. The occurrence is alleged to have taken place at 5-30 a.m. On 23-4-1995 due to some dispute which occurred the previous night. Ayyub alias Bagga and Nathial alias Kala co-accused each armed with Chhuri are alleged to have inflicted the blows on the person of James Masih. When Inayat Masih petitioner stepped ahead to intervene, he was given two Soti blows by Shamman petitioner- accused which fell on his left thigh and left flank. The occurrence is said to have been seen by Asghar, Sadiq and Mst. Ruqia along with Inayat Masih complainant. The bail plea of Shamman petitioner-accused has been rejected by the lower Court. Hence he has filed this petition to try his luck to be admitted to bail.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State Counsel and gone through the record before me. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Naik Muhammad v. The State 1991 SCM R 1630 according to which an accused not alleged to have caused any injury to the deceased was admitted to bail with the reasoning that the precise liability of the petitioner is a matter of further inquiry. He has also referred to Khadim Hussain v. The State and another 1981 SCMR 1115 wherein the accused who had given the Soti blows to the complainant was admitted to bail on the ground that the concerned accused did not appear to share common intention of causing death of the victim of that case. I would be glossing over an important aspect of the matter by expressing that in the instant matter after the completion of the occurrence to the extent of James Masih deceased, Shamman petitioner-accused is said to have given the Soti blows on the person of Inayat Masih complainant as projected above. Both the injuries are the contusions.
The aforesaid rulings are applicable to the instant matter. Learned counsel for the State has not been able to make me take an exception to the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused. I, therefore, hold that it is a fit case for the admission of this petitioner to bail whose involvement is held to be a question of further inquiry so far as the alleged murder of James Masih is concerned.
3. For what has been said above, I accept this petition and admit Shamman petitioner-accused to bail in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Sahiwal who shall retain the papers after attestation of the bail bond etc. And shall add the same to the judicial file as and when sent up to the Court of Session in terms of order passed under section 190(3), Cr. P. C .
5. Copy data subject to payment of usual charges, if desired.