' The petitioner has sought bail in case registered vide F.I.R. No,17 of 1997 under section 324/34, P.P.C.
Later on added 302, P.P.C. Police Station Fort Abbas on 24-1-1997 at the instance of Rasheed Maseeh.
2. Brief facts of the case as narrated in the First Information Report are that on 24-1-1997 Yousaf Maseeh was coming to house when he was waylaid in the street by Yaqoob Maseeh. Mehmood Maseeh, Abbas Maseeh son of Mushtaq Maseeh along with the present petitioner. After an altercation abuses were exchanged, whereupon the petitioner, armed with dagger, caused one blow in the abdomen of Yousaf Maseeh.
3. The Additional Sessions Judge, Bahawalnagar, vide his order, dated 23-2-1998 rejected the post- arrest bail application of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on 1-2-1997 Yousif Maseeh when alive compromised with Yaqoob Maseeh and co-accused including the petitioner his dispute. This compromise was allowed by a Civil Judge/Magistrate Section 30, Fort Abbas. Consequently, the petitioner alongwith others was released. He further contended that after the death of Yousaf Maseeh on 25-6-1997 the petitioner was re-arrested on 13-7-1997. The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the prolong admission of the deceased in the hospital. The deceased was admitted in the hospital on 24-1-1997 and was discharged on 5-2-1997. He was re- admitted on 10-2-1997 and the wound was reopened on 20-2-1997 and left for his house, but was re-admitted on 24-6-1997 and consequently, died on 25-6-1997 because of septicemia due to the injury caused by the petitioner. It was further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that one Nadeem Maseeh, the real brother of Mehmood Maseeh was hit by a dagger blow in his abdomen which was declared as Ghyr-Jaifah by the doctor who gave the medico-legal report. It is stated that injury of Nadeem Maseeh was suppressed by the prosecution. The occurrence took place in the daylight. Lastly, it has been contended that compromise affected between the parties had deprived the petitioner of lodging the cross-version as such are at disadvantage. The petitioner-accused is behind the bar since 13-7-1997 and the trial of the case has not been started.
' Learned counsel for the State stoutly opposed the bail application. It is stated that the accused is named in the F.I.R. It is a daylight occurrence. The motive of the occurrence is quarrel between the two parties. The challah has been submitted before the Court.
I have given due considerations to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.
The learned Additional Sessions Judge, vide his order, dated 23-2-1998 has failed to take in view the compromise affected between the parties.
' A compromise effected between the parties when Yousaf was alive has to be given importance.
The subsequent arrest in presence of the compromise makes the case of further inquiry.. I am, therefore, inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail subject to furnishing his bail bond in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.