1. ' This bail application has been moved on behalf of applicant Aijaz alias Aijaz-ulHague involved in Crime No,132 of 2000 under sections 324 and 34, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Digri on 4-9- 2000 on the basis of report entered at P.P. Tando Jan Muhammad on 3-9-2000 lodged by complainant Muhammad Aslam.
2. ' The case of the prosecution as narrated in the F.I.R. Is that complainant and his brother Mukhtiar Ahmed have a dispute over gross with Farzand Ali and his sons. On 2-9-2000 he and his brother Mukhtiar Ahmed were waiting in their house for his cousin Muhammad Qassim who had come from Tando Jan Muhammad but did not return till late hours. At about 1-00 hours they were attracted by the cries emarating from the house of Farzand Ali and the complainant, Mukhtiar Ahmed, Muhammad Akbar and Rasheed Ahmed rushed there. They saw that near the heap of chili the applicant Aijaz Ali had caught hold of Muhammad Qassim whereas Anwarul Haque, Abdul Haque both sons of Farzand Ali were inflicting sharp side hatchet blows to Muhammad Qassim. In the meantime Farzand Ali came over there and on his asking his sons namely Aijaz All alias Aijazul Haque and Anawarul Haque and Abdul Haque ran away. The complainant party found that Muhammad Qassim had sustained sharp side hatchet blows on his right shoulder, chest and abdomen. The vehicle was brought from Tando Jan Muhammad and the injured was taken at the first instance to R.H.C. Tando Jan Muhammad and was subsequently referred to Hyderabad. The F.I.R. Was lodged against, the present applicant Aijaz Ali alias Aijazul Haque, Anwarul Haque and Abdul Haque for having caused hatchet blows to injured Muhammad Qassim with the intention to murder him. The bail application moved before the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Mirpurkhas was rejected vide order dated 7-11-2000 hence this bail application.
3. ' I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Anwar Ansari learned counsel for the State and perused the police papers.
4. ' Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the allegation against the present applicant in the F.I.R. Is that he caught hold of the injured. According to him no injury was allegedly caused by the present applicant. Learned counsel submits that the incident has taken place at the lands of the complainant party and there was exchange of hot words between the parties. The learned counsel further argued that in this case the father and his three sons were falsely implicated due to enmity. Learned counsel has further submitted that there was no intention to commit murder of injured Muhammad Qassim.
5. ' Learned counsel for the State has raised no objection to the grant of bail.
6. ' From the police papers I find that the case has been challaned in which Anwarul Haque and Abdul Haque who allegedly caused injuries to the injured have been shown in Column No,2 and according to the opinion of police accused Abdul Haque and Anwarul Haque were innocent. It is also evident from the police papers that the incident occurred at the Chili heap owned by applicant Aijaz Ali alias Aijazul Haque. There is a counter-fire lodged by complainant Bashir Ahmed.
7. It has been admitted by the complainant at the very outset of the F.I.R. That there is a dispute between them and Farzand Ali and his sons. It appears that because of the dispute which was in existence between the parties the father and his three sons were roped in the case. The only role which has been attributed to the applicant is that he held the injured while his two other brothers inflicted hatchet blows on him. Hon'ble Supreme, Court in a case titled Basharat Hussain v. Ghulam Hussain reported in 1978 SCM R 357, was pleased to affirm the order of Lahore High Court whereby the bail was granted; in a murder case wherein accused was alleged to have held deceased when his son hit the deceased on head thereby holding that the case to be one requiring further inquiry.
8. ' In the circumstances I am convinced that the case of the applicant calls for further inquiry, thus, he is entitled to the concession of bail. Accordingly the applicant is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs, 1,00,000 (one lac) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.