Petitioner Muhammad Asghar alias Nona through the instant petition has sought for post-arrest bail in case FIR No, 436 dated 9.6.2003 under Sections 324/337-F (iii)/34 PPC registered with Police Station Civil Lines, Gujrat.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as per FIR is that on 9.6.2003 at about 7:45 p.m. Muhammad Asghar alias Nona armed with .30 bore pistol and Reehan with .222-rifle, in furtherance of their common intention have attempted the Qatal-e-Amd of complainant Abdul Qayyum. Muhammad Asghar Alias Nona had fired with .30-bore pistol at him hitting on his thigh. Reehan had fired at him with .222-rifle hitting on his front side of the right shin. The motive behind the occurrence is previous enmity between them.
3. It has been contended on his behalf that he has been falsely roped in; that he has been ascribed solitary fire shot to the injured/complainant; that he did not repeat the fire to him; that he is behind the bars since 21.6.2003; and that he is previous non-convict.
4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel has opposed the petition on the ground that he is named in the FIR; that he has been ascribed specific role of causing fire-arm injury to the, injured on his thigh; and that the crime weapon pistol has been recovered from him and so, he is connected with the crime.
5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with the help of the available record.
6. The fact remains that he has ascribed solitary fire shot to the complainant/injured on his non- vital part of the body like thigh.. He did not repeat fire on him. In these circumstances, it is yet to be seen that if he had any intention to kill him. And such question can only be determine at trial. His case, therefore, is covered under sub-section (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C. requiring further inquiry into his guilt.
The fact also remains that the offence under Section 337-F (iii) PPC is not covered under the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) Cr.P.C.
7. He is behind the bars and stated to be previous non-convict, which fact has not been controverted by the other side.
8. In these circumstances, I find that the case for his enlargement on bail has been made out. His petition, therefore, is accepted and he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 50;000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.