' This order will dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous 2513-B of 1977 and Criminal Miscellaneous 3006- B/77.
2. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, on 4-2-77 had granted bail to Mian Khan accused on the ground that the injury that he caused was of a simple nature, and the allegation made against the petitioner is not of serious nature, The bail was under section 325/34, P. P. C , and was not available in an offence under section 302, P. P. C. Mst. Nooran died in the hospital one month after the occurrence. After the conversion of the case (to section 302, P. P. C.), a fresh basil application was moved, and the learned Additional Sessions Judge granted bail on 16-4-77 to Mian Khan accused on the ground, that he caused only simple injury to Mst. Nooran, not on vital part of the body. The weapon of offence has also been recovered from Mian Khan.
3. The learned Judge was of the view that the role attributed to this accused was not of serious nature. When the above matter came to the notice of my Lord, Mr. Justice Ghulam Majadid Mirza, he issued a suo motu notice for cancel'ation of bail granted to Mian Khan.
4. The learned Additional Sessions Judge did not grant bail to Jaisal, who has filed the above application before this Court for grant of bail.
5. F. I. R. Was lodged at Police Station, Bahlak, District Lyallpur on 20-1-77 regarding the incident that had taken place on 4-1-77 at the statement of Nosher (son of Mst. Nooran deceased). It is alleged in the F. I. R. That Jaisal, petitioner and Khan bad a dispute with Najamat (his relative) over the sale of cattle. Sister of Jaisal is married to Mian Khan, Manzoor is a relative of Mian Khan. Jaisal had also given an application to the police against the complainant whereupon investigation was conducted against him, wherein he was exonerated. The above dispute was settled on 3rd of January, and on 4th of January 1977, in the morning Me, Nooran was standing outside her house.
Jaisal passed by and she taunted, whereupon she was admonished by them. The incident resulted in a verbal quarrel. Annoyed by the attitude of the lady, the accused returned with their arms and attacked the lady. (Jaisal was armed with dang and Mian Khan with a sota, and remaining unarmed). Khan accused caught hold by her and exhorted Manzoor, his companion, to finish her Thereafter, Jaisal inflicted a dang blow on the right thigh, and Mian inflicted sota blow on her right hip.
6. I have perused the post-mortem report of Mst. Nooran deceased. She is described as 50 years old. She had two blunt weapon injuries on her body. According to opinion of the doctor, the cause of her death is suffering of Injuries 1 and 2, which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
7. Learned counsel for Mian Khan and Jaisal have raised the following contentions before me : (1)
There is delay of 16 days in lodging of the F. I. R. (2) The death occurred after one month after suffering injuries. Therefore, the death cannot be attributed to the injuries suffered. (3) Injuries are not on vital parts of the body. (4) The murderous intention of the assailants is negatived by the fact that initially the case was not registered under section 307, but under section 325, P. P. C. (4-A)
Since the discretion in case of Mian Khan has been exercised in his favour by the learned Judge, the High Court should not interfere. (5) Re. The F. I. R., one injury was inflicted on the thigh whereas the other injury is on the hip. Since there is injury on the stomach which has not been attributed to any one : to that extent, the medical evidence contradicts the ccular account. (6) Since the post- mortem report has disclosed swelling, it cannot be caused by a weapon like dang.
8. The above contentions of the learned counsel do not warrant grant of bail in this case. According to the doctor, the lady died as a result of injuries suffered. There is no material available to me at this stage that there was an intervening cause of death. In a state of agony, a human being does not behave like a statue. So, the precise location of a blow is a matter of opinion only.
9. Under these circumstances, I find no contradiction between injuries] given in the post-mortem report and the account given in the F. I. R. Delay in the lodging of the F. I. R. Per se, is no ground for holding that it is a false' document. The injuries which are found on the person of the deceased can very well be inflicted by the weapon which the accused used. Intention of an accused person is to be gathered from the circumstance of each case. When two young men delivered forceful blows with dangs on any part of the body of a lady of the age of 50 years or above, they should understand natural con- B sequences of their acts. It is alleged against the petitioners that they had come armed with preparation at the place of occurrence, having been annoyed by previous conduct of the lady, and thereafter both the petitioners have been attributed overt acts.
10. All above expressions used by me are germane to the decision of this petition only and will have no bearing on the merits of the case thereafter.
11. Under the circumstances, it is not a fit case for grant of bail. The petition of Jaisal is dismissed, and the bail granted to Mian Khan is cancelled.