Muhammad Ashraf-petitioner seeks his post arrest bail in Crime Report No, 86, dated 14.4.2001, under Section 324/109 P.P.C., registered with Police Station Nishatabad, District Faisalabad, at the instance of one Muhammad Iqbal.
2. Allegation against the petitioner is that on 14.2.2001 at about 6.45 a.m. after making a shot with pistol at Muhammad Javed, he scampered off from the spot. Muhammad Javed in an injured condition approached Muhammad Iqbal, Muhammad Ashgar and Shafaqat at their Dera and told that he was fired at by the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner with great vehemence argues that on receipt of a fire-arm wound on head, Muhammad Javed could neither walk nor speak, that Muhammad Javed was found lying injured on canal bank and was taken to the hospital; that his uncle Khushi Muhammad who is an enemy of petitioner's family got him implicated wrongly in this case through his friend Muhammad Iqbal; that it was an un-witnessed occurrence and that Muhammad Ashraf and Muhammad Shafi had appeared before a learned Magistrate and their affidavits were duly attested by the said learned Magistrate, which have been annexed with this file as annexures C and Cl.
4. Conversely, learned counsel for the State while opposing this petition submits that Muhammad Javed had told the complainant and others that the petitioner was responsible for causing wound on his person. Adds that it is mentioned in the F.I.R. that Muhammad Iqbal-complainant and Muhammad Shafi got him admitted to Allied Hospital, Faisalabad.
5. I have with much care and devotion heard and considered respective arguments of learned counsel for both the sides and perused the medico legal report. Admittedly, it was an unseen occurrence. The very fact that the victim of serious murderous assault established contact with witnesses is not believable. Reason for so stating is that Muhammad Javed suffered a fire-arm lacerated wound of entry on back of his head. Blackening was present around the wound. Likewise, there was a corresponding exist wound on right side of lower jaw along with lacerated wound on outer aspect of left side of lower lip. A lacerated wound was also present on the tongue. Operation notes incorporated in the medico legal report show that tongue was repaired, foreign body removed, dental wiring of a facture mandible was done, mouth region appears to be terribly effected. I am of the firm view that on receipt of such a serious wound on head involving lower jaw facture and injury to the tongue, a man would not be capable of performing volitional acts.
Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that Muhammad Javed could have neither moved nor talked to any one has force. Claim of the witnesses that they shifted the victim to the hospital where he was admitted for his treatment is not borne out from the medico legal report. Neither name of Muhammad Iqbal-complainant nor Muhammad Shafi PW is mentioned in the relevant column, where name of Abdul Hameed, brother of Muhammad Javed is mentioned. From this, concoction of prosecution story can well be adjudged. Muhammad Iqbal and Muhammad Shafi are also not supporting the prosecution version now. There is no eye-witness of the occurrence.
Story appears to have been fabricated on the basis of guess, gossip, rumour and imagination.
Possibility of involvement of the petitioner at the instance of his uncle and others cannot be ruled out altogether. I am of the firm view that a case for grant of bail is made out.
6. Accordingly, by accepting this petition, I direct that the petitioner be released from custody, subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.