Through this petition F.aryad Masih alias Phaju petitioner has sought post-arrestbail in case F.I.R.
No,657 registered at Police Station Satellite Town, Gujranwala on 25-12-2001 for offences under sections 337/A(i)/337-A(ii)/337F(i)/337-F(ii)/324/427/ 148/149. P.P.C. Subsequently,on account of death of Shehzad deceased section 302, P.P.C. was added to the F.I.R.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed that according to the F.I.R. the present petitioner was empty-handed during the occurrence but during the investigation Samuel Masih P.W. had made a statement to the effect that the present petitioner had caused a brick blow on Samuel P.W.'s head. It is admitted at all hands that the present petitioner had not caused any injury to Shehzad deceased and in the F.I.R. no specific injury to any of the injured persons had been attributed to the present petitioner. The narration of the incident contained in the I F.I.R. further shows that the petitioner was not initially present at the spot when Shehzad deceased was given injuries by the petitioner's co-accused but the petitioner had statedly emerged at the spot after the main incident was already over and after Shehzad deceased had already received his injuries at the hands of the petitioner's co-accused.
The learned counsel for the State as well as the police officer present with the record have confirmed the fact that during all the three investigations conducted in this case the present petitioner had been found to be innocent and also that during the investigation A no recovery of any sort had been effected from the petitioner. The investigation to the extent of the present petitioner has already been finalised and concluded and, thus, continued custody of the petitioner-in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this stage. The question regarding sharing of common object by the petitioner with his co-accused as also the question regarding his vicarious liability for the offences allegedly committed by his co-accused shall be gone into by the learned trial Court at the time of the trial.
3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is. therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court: