MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN, J.-Mazhar Mahmood. Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order dated 23-7-1995 of Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi, granting bail to Basit respondent No. 1 in case under section 302/324/34, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Airport, Rawalpindi, vide F.I.R. No. 192 dated 6-10-1994.
2. According to prosecution, the petitioner alongwith Tariq and Basharat, in furtherance of their common intention, caused the death of Muhammad Waheed and injuries to Mazhar Mahmood petitioner on 6-10-1994 at 7.00 a.m. At Suzuki Stand Dhok Hafiz. Tariq fired shot at Muhammad Waheed hitting his left ear. Basharat gave Sarya blow on the head of Waheed. Basit caused simple fire:arm injury on the left leg of the complainant/petitioner.
3. The High Court has granted bail to Basit respondent on the grounds that he having been found innocent during investigation, his name was placed in Column No.2 of the challan and that he had not caused any injury to the deceased.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the finding of the police with regard to the innocence of the respondent was not binding on the Court, more particularly, when there was no material in support thereof.
5. We have considered the matter carefully. This Court is primarily a Constitutional Court and not expected to go into matters concerning grant of bail by the High Court unless there are compelling reasons to do so. Furthermore, considerations for cancellation of by a Court of competent jurisdiction are different from considerations for granting bail to an accused person. Once the F(iii)
PPC. As the injury has been caused by a bullet fired by rifle which penetrated through and through and caused an exit wound of the denomination of 5 cm x 3cm, the appellant is sentenced to 3 years' R.I. As Tazir with Daman amounting to Rs. 10.000/- or in case of default of payment of Daman, he will be dealt in the manner as prescribed by section 337-Y (ii) PPC. Since sentence of years' R.I.
And imposition Daman for an amount of Rs. 10,000/- is not a severer punishment and learned counsel for the appellant had in fact conceded to the same, therefore, no notice is deemed necessary to be given to the appellant. The appeal is partly allowed in terms of the alteration in the conviction and sentence of the appellant as indicated above Cr. Revision No. 405/94 fails and is hereby dismissed.