' Muhammad Azeem complainant got recorded F.I.R. No,325, dated 3-5-1999 at 8-50 a.m. At Police Station Satellite Town, Gujranwala under section 324/148/149, Pakistan Penal Code with the allegation that he was driving Motorcycle No,GAG 4524 while Malik Khalil-ur-Rehman alias Lili was on his back. Another person arrived from the eastern side. There was an accident. They fell down.
There was an altercation with the aforesaid unknown persons who slapped. In the meanwhile, Muhammad Aslam petitioner-accused armed with iron rod, his brother Asghar armed with pistol, Billa armed with Danda, Kalu armed with Danda, his father Muhammad Din and one Talib Hussain each armed with Danda arrived. Muhammad Din raised the Lalkara that Lili should not go unescaped. Asghar and Shahbaz fired with their respective weapon which hit Malik Khalil- urRehman alias Lili who fell down and there was pool of blood. Thereafter, all the accused started beating them and that he also received injuries on different parts of his body. Malik Zia and Malik Shafique were also attracted at the spot. The accused persons made good their escape alongwith their respective weapons. Malik Khalil-ur-Rehman was referred to Lahore by the Medical Officer.
The supplementary statement of Muhammad Azeem with respect to motive has been recorded to the effect that four days before Asghar and Shahbaz co-accused restrained Malik Khalil-ur- Rehman alias Lili from arriving in their Mohallah as he continued with nefarious activities there.
2. Both Malik Khalil-ur-Rehman alias Lili and Muhammad Azeem complainant were medically examined. Three fire-arm injuries were found on the person of Malik Khalil-ur-Rehman alias Lili while two injuries were found on the person of Muhammad Azeem injured-complainant P.W.
' However, Malik Khalil-ur-Rehman alias Lili expired and section 302, Pakistan Penal Code has been added.
3. The investigation of the case has been conducted. Muhammad Aslam petitioner-accused is said to have led to the recovery of Danda while under police arrest. The bail plea of Muhammad Aslam petitioner has been rejected by the learned Court of Session who has filed this petition before this Court for his admission to bail.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned State Counsel and gone through the record before me. The main contentions of the learned counsel for Muhammad Aslam petitioner are that he did not cause the injuries on the person of Malik Khalil-ur-Rehman alias Lili deceased; that there is general type of allegation of infliction of injuries on the person of Muhammad Azeem injured complainant about which the role of Muhammad Aslam is not specified and that the recovery of Danda from him is of no legal weight. He added that the supplementary statement with respect to motive is of no legal value because no specific evidence has been collected in this regard. On the contrary learned counsel for the complainant and the learned State Counsel canvassed that it was in the prosecution of the common object that Muhammad Aslam and his co-accused formed an unlawful assembly, rioted and made the assault on Malik Khalilur-Rehman alias Lili, who expired afterwards, and Muhammad Azeem complainant. According to them it is a case prima facie falling under section 302/324/148/149, Pakistan Penal Code and that Muhammad Aslam petitioner is not entitled to be admitted to bail.
5. I would express that there is no need to give weight to the alleged motive and the alleged recovery even at this initial stage as the weight shall have to be analysed during the trial. Suffice it to express that Supplementary statement is not a part of the F.I.R. Recorded under section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a register maintained under Rule 24.5. By the police and thereafter, the investigation is set in motion under section 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As such supplementary statement of the complainant continuing the motive with respect to the initial occurrence need not be followed. The weapon. Of offence said to have been got recovered at the instance of Muhammad Aslam was admittedly not stained with blood. I am in full agreement with the learned counsel for Muhammad Aslam petitioner that due to the facts that Muhammad Aslam did not injure Malik Khalil-ur-Rehman alias Lili deceased and with respect to the infliction of injury on the person of Muhammad Azeem complainant there is no specification of the part of the body where the injury was inflicted by Muhammad Aslam petitioner; the case of the prosecution against him is that of further inquiry. Further, it is a case of roping in whole of the family and this aspect can also be considered while exercising the discretion and the jurisdiction, vested in the Court, in favour of Muhammad Aslam petitioner.
' I, therefore, hold that it is a fit case to admit Muhammad Aslam petitioner to bail than to retain him in jail.
6. I, therefore, accept this application and admit Muhammad Aslam petitioner-accused to bail in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (rupees one lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Gujranwala with the direction to appear before the learned trial Court on every date of hearing failing which the learned trial Court may cancel his bail and may proceed further in accordance with law.