1. ' Abdul Hafeez, petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,964 of 1999, dated 6-11-1999, under sections 392/324/337-F(i), 337-F(ii)/34, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Saddar Pakpattan Sharif at the instance of Mahboob Ali, complainant.
2. ' According to the prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioner is that he caused Sota blows on Nabi Bakhsh deceased, Ghulam Mohy-ud-Din and Khalil Ahmad, P.Ws. While his co- accused Muhammad Iqbal caused fire-arm injuries on Nabi Bakhsh who succumbed to the firearm injuries.
3. ' The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that from the postmortem examination, there is no injury available on the person of deceased Nabi Bakhsh having been caused by Sota blow while two injuries available on the person of Ghulam Mohy-ud-Din are with blunt weapon and one injury on Khalil. All are simple in nature. It has been further argued-that from the allegations levelled in the F.I.R., the petitioner is alleged to have caused Sota blows after the deceased and P.Ws. Had received fire-arm injuries, therefore, he has not facilitated the commission of murder of Nabi Bakhsh of his co-accused Muhammad Iqbal. Mere allegation against the petitioner is that with blunt weapon he caused simple injuries and prima facie he cannot be held vicariously responsible for the death of Nabi Bakhsh.
4. ' On the other side, the learned counsel for State has opposed the bail on the ground that the petitioner is nominated accused in the F.I.R. Specific role has been attributed and he is vicariously liable for causing the death of Nabi Bakhsh and the offence falls under the prohibitory clause.
5. ' I have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. According to the F.I.R., the petitioner caused blunt weapon injuries on the prosecution witnesses after the deceased and the prosecution witnesses had received fire-arm injuries at the hands of Muhammad Iqbal co-accused. Therefore, prima facie, the petitioner is not responsible for having facilitated the commission of murder of Nabi Bakhsh and the role attributed to him for having caused injuries on the P.Ws. Cannot be termed at this stage that he is vicariously liable for causing the death of Nabi Bakhsh, therefore, the case of the petitioner falls under section 497(2), Cr.P.C. i.e, of further inquiry. Resultantly, the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.