MIAN NAZIR AKHT-AR, J.- The petitiorter seeks bail in a case registered against him and others vide FIR No. 95, dated 17.5.1996 for offences u/Ss.- 302/424/148/149 of the PPC at P.S. Badami Bagh, Lahore.
2. Earlier the petitioner had filed a Bail Petition (Cr.M. 5235-B/97) whichwas dismissed for non- prosecution on 12.2,1998.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Learned AAG on behalf of the State. In the FIR, the complainant made a general allegation that when he reached the spot, he found that Kashif, petitioner and his companions on the one hand and Muhammad Shafique, Muhammad Ashraf, Muhammad Afsar and their father Muhammad Rafique on the other were exchanging fire as a result of which Muhammad Naeem received a fire-arm injury on his head and fell down on the ground. In the earlier part of the FIR, it was mentioned that the petitioner had taken Muhammad Naeem, deceased with him from his residence. This, prima facie, indicates that Muhammad Naeem, deceased was also one of the petitioner's companions. In his supplementary' statement dated 16:7.1995 the complainant implicated about 15/16 persons on the petitioner's side. The supplementary statement dated 16.7.95 appears to be the result of the complainant's information gathered from different sources and could not be given much weight. Moreover, the statement made by Muhammad Rafique u/S. 161 of the Cr.P.C, shows that out of the petitioner's companions Tanveer, Sadiq, Shakeel and Muham'mad Akbar were armed with pistols and that due to their firing Muhammad Naeem and his brother Muhammad Asif were injured. As mentioned above, Muhammad Naeem seemed to be the petitioner's companions and apparently there was no reason for.His companions to fire at him. The possibility that Muhammad Naeem had received a bullet injury due to the firing of Muhammad Rafique's party cannot be ruled out. Anyhow, the question as to who had committed the aggression and whose shot had resulted in injuries to Muhammad Naeem deceased and Muhammad Asif PW can be properly decided by the trial Court after recording evidence. Prima facie, the case requires further probe and inquiry qua the petitioner's guilt and at this stage, there are no reasonable grounds for believing that he has committed the offence alleged against him. Muhammad Akbar, co-accused who was implicated by the complainant in his supplementary statement and who alongwith Tanveer, 'Sadiq and Shakeel had allegedly fired with pistols, was allowed bail by this court in Cr.M. Nb. 2965-B/97 vide order dated 3.7.1997.
4. Therefore, the petition is accepted and the petitioner is allowed bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 100,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.