' Petitioner Mst. Sabeela is asking for her post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,355, dated 28-12-2003, registered under sections 302, 324, 440, 448, 452, 148, 149 and 109, P.P.C. At Police Station Bhera, District Sargodha.
2. Munir Ahmed, the complainant in this case narrated his version by stating that at about 7-00 p.m. On the day of occurrence i,e, 28-12-2003, he was present at his house and some other persons of the same village had come to his house for inquiring about the health of his wife, that all of a sudden the petitioner and three accused while armed with weapons as are attributed to them in the F.I.R. Specifically came there. The petitioner is said to have been armed with a Sota while others were also armed with guns and Sotas. Shamas-ud-Din co-accused raised Lalkara that he had come to take back the possession of his house. That on seeing him the complainant closed the door of his Haveli but the accused and petitioner went towards his Baithak on the main road and after breaking open its door entered into the house and they damaged the household articles.
When they were stopped from doing this, Shamasud-Din fired at Sajida, daughter of the complainant. Imran fired the second shot hitting again her as well as Muhammad Ameer. That Taj Muhammad amongst them fired, which hit Muhammad Amin, injured P.W. In the meanwhile, Khaliq and the complainant were involved in a physical altercation. The former gave a butt blow of his pistol hitting the latter on his head. Ihsan Elahi gave a Sota blow. On Nasrullah hitting him on his eye. The attribution to Mst. Sabeela is of causing a Danda blow on the complainant, which hit him on his head. It was stated that during this episode the accused party and the complainant party started fighting physically with each other and some of the armed accused fired at the complainant party hitting them on different parts of the body.
3. The Rowla attracted the P. Ws. And they separated them but Sajida succumbed to her injuries. It was said that during the fight (URDU TEXT) the petitioner party was also injured. The motive part of the story is that there was a dispute with respect to the house, where the complainant lived and the matter became subject-matter of the suits of different Courts and the petitioner party failed to succeed there and therefore, they had come to take over physical possession and caused death of Sajida.
4. The basic ground urged before this Court for grant of bail to Mst. Sabeela is that she was having a suckling baby with her in the jail. It was further stated that no allegation was made against her for causing any injury to the deceased Sajida. That even in the F.I.R. The complainant party admitted of a fight but suppressed the true facts leading to the fight. It was further stated that usually women do not commit aggression when male members are available. It was further stated that some of the members of the petitioner side admittedly were injured and Mst. Sabeela suffered a fire-arm injury and according to the doctor pellets were found subcutaneous at her forehead.
Her medical certificate was referred to in this respect.
5. Keeping in view all these facts and while also placing reliance on the following judgment:-- ' Nasim Mai alias Akbari v. The State 2003 YLR 3029; Mst. Surayya Bibi v. The State 2004 M LD 199; Mst.
Zahidi Bibi and others v. The State 2002 PCr.LJ 1035; Maqbool Hussain v. The State KLR 1991 Cr.C. 233; Mahmood Ahmed v. The State KLR 1994 Cr.C.
338.
' This Court allows bail to the petitioner, who is in lock-up since around 28-12-2003 subject to her furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one respectable local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.