1. ' Abdul Wahid and Ramzan seek bail in Criminal No,74 of 1996 Police Station Umer Kot lodged by complainant Allah Bachayo for offence under section 324 Q&D Ordinance read with sections 504, 114 and 34, P.P.C.
2. ' Prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R. Is that on 13-7-1996 complainant along with his son Gul Hassan who deals in milk selling in Dhoro Naro as such when they reached Dhoro Naro to receive amount of sell of milk and after getting the amount Ghulam Haider son of the complainant and Saifur Rehman son-in-law of the complainant a primary teacher met them and after purchasing house-hold articles they proceeded towards their house. When the complainant reached near Mosque of Manghanhar at about 22-00 hours they identified on the bulb light that accused Ramzan was armed with Lathi, Abdul Wahid was having hatchet and Abdul Karim a Police Constable having Lathi. Abdul Karim instigated his companions not to spare Gul Hassan, upon which, Abdul Karim gave sharp side hatchet injuries on the person of Gul Hassan and Ramzan also caused Lathi blows on the person of his head and other parts of the body. After receiving injuries Gul Hassan fell down and went unconscious. On the commotion and cries, Umed Ali Obhayo came running and saw the accused persons going towards their houses. Complainant Ghulam Haider took injured to hospital and thereafter reported the matter with Police Post Dhoro Naro. A formal report was lodged which subsequently was incorporated as required in 154, Cr.P.C. During the investigation Abdul Karim was let off by the police. Final charge-sheet against the accused was submitted where bail application on behalf of the applicants was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge vide order, dated 24-9-1996. Hence this bail application.
3. ' I have heard Mr. Ghulam Moinuddin Baloch learned counsel for the applicants who contends that case is the result of enmity with witnesses Saifur Rehman and Obhayo who are sons-in-law of the complainant, whereas according to the learned counsel Umed Ali witness had stated in his 161, Cr.P.C. Statement that Abdul Wahid was having Lathi in his hand and he has not supported the case of the prosecution as narrated in the F.I.R. According to the learned counsel this case is result of enmity between the parties and the case is of further enquiry and the applicants/accused are in jail since more than eight months and they may be released on bail.
4. ' Mr. Amanullah Qureshi learned Assttant Advocate-General contends that names of the applicants/accused are mentioned in the F.I.R. And specific role of causing injuries to the injured is assigned to them which is supported by the medical evidence that injured has received six injuries which according to medical certificate are as follows:--
(1) A curved incised wound 7 c.m. x 5 c.m. On parital region.
(2) Incised wound 7 c.m. x 2 c.m. On right side of frontal region above the right eyebrow.
(3) Incised wound 9 c.m. x 1 c.m. On right temper occipital region.
(4) Bruise swelling on right scepular region 21 c.m. x 3 c.m.
(5) Bruise swelling on right lumber region 18 c.m. x 3 c.m.
(6) Swelling on right letral side of neck 20 c.m. x 5 c.m.
5. ' Injured was referred to Civil Hospital, Mirpur Khas for X-Ray and treatment so that final opinion can be communicated after the X-Ray Report. Opinion regarding all the injuries 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 was reserved. Kind of weapon used, injuries Nos.1 to 3 were caused by sharp cutting substance and injuries Nos.5 and 6 caused by hard and blunt substance. After receipt of X-Ray Report the Medical Officer Rural Health Centre Dhoro Naro through letter, dated 1-8-1996 intimated the police about the injuries of injured Gul Hassan which reads as under:-- "X-Ray skull A.P. And Lat: view ' Depressed fracture of right frontal bone seen. X-Ray chest A.P. View ' Fracture of the right 6th and 7th ribs and pneumothorax and obliteration of the Rt.-cost phrenic angle seen."
6. ' On 19-10-1996 through letter in continuation of medico-legal certificate the Medical Officer intimated the police about the expert opinion received by him vide Letter No,LMCN/Estt/(MLC)/2364, dated 28-9-1996 which reads as follows:-- "X-Ray report reads that:-- X-Ray skull (AP (two films (L 131) duly signed.
7. ' Fractures are seen in the (Rt) frontal and (Rt.) Panetal bone in these ski gram.
8. X-Ray chest - AP (single film (L131) duly signed.
9. ' Air is seen in the (Rt.) lateral wall of chest subcutaneously in this ski gram.
10. ' Fracture is seen in the (Rt) 6th Autenirely and (Rt) 7th rib at posterior, anterior junction in ski gram.
11. ' No sign of pneumothorax and Hem thorax arc seen in this ski gram. Nature of injuries.
12. ' Injuries Nos.1, 2, 3; 4, 5, 6 kept reserved are declared as under:- Injuries Nos.1 and 2 stood Shaijah-i- Hashimah section 337-A(ii). Injury ' No,3 stood Shajiah-i-Mudihah section 337-A(ii).
13. ' Injury No,4 stood Ghayr-jaifah Hashimah section 337-F(v). Injuries Nos.5 and 6 stood as simple in nature."
14. I have gone through the material placed with case. I have also perused the medical certificate referred hereinabove. The contention of Mr. Ghulam Moinuddin Baloch that Umed Ali witness in his 161, Cr.P.C. Statement has stated that Abdul Wahid was having Lathi and that case is the result of enmity. For the decision of the bail application only tentative assessment of evidence is to he carried on. Deeper appreciation of the same is to be done by the trial Court after recording of the ex.;idence It is rightly said that enmity is a double-edged weapon and cuts both ways. Causing of the injuries may he the result of the enmity so alleged, the incident is alleged to have taken place on 13-7-1997 at 23-30 hours and the matter was reported on 14-7-1996 with the police whereas according to the FIR. Distance of the plate of incident and police station is 30 k.Ms. Specific role of causing injuries is attributed to the applicants/accused in F.I.R. Lodged by the complainant and 164, Cr.P.C. Statements of the prosecution witnesses namely Gul Hassah the injured. Saifur Rehman.
15. Ghulam Haider and Obhayo. During investigation the police noted down the injuries on the person of injured on 15-7-1996 and at the time of preparation of Mashirnama blood was oozing out from the injuries. Police also prepared Mashirnama of Wardat and found blood on the Wardat. The incident was witnessed by the P.Ws. On the electric bulb of the mosque near which the incident is alleged to have taken place. Until and unless Obhayo is not confronted with his 161 Cr.P.C.
16. Statement his evidence while deciding this bail application cannot be discarded. The location and nature of the injuries prima facie establishes that accused/applicants are guilty for the offence for which they have been challenged and the offence falls under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.
17. I ' The upshot of the above discussion is that application is devoid of c substance and merit which must fail, the same is accordingly dismissed.