ALLAH DITTA AND 10 Others vs THF STATE, Respondent

ORDER

1. This is a petition for bail under section 498, Cr. P. C. The facts are these. On the 18th of August 1969, F. I. R. No. 80 was registered at Police Station Karoor at 9-20 a.m. Under sections 452/ 149 and 148, P.

2. P. C., at the instance of M:anzoor Hussain, servant of Muhammad Ramzan. The same day F. I. R. No. 81, was registered at the instance of Faqir Muhammad son of Bahadur under sections 452/149 and 148, P. P. C. The police version of the incident is as follows: - Muhammad Ramzan was in actual possession of a small piece of land situated in Chak No. 84- A/TDA. The actual owners of the land, namely, Faqir Muhammad and Makhna, entered into a contract to sell the land in dispute with Muhammad Ramzan and took an advance of Rs. 700 pending registration of the sale deed. The perspective vendee Muhammad Ramzan it is alleged, with the consent of the vendors installed hand pump in this land and physically entered into its possession; Thereafter, the vendors, Faqir Muhammad and Makbna, changed their mind and decided, to sell the land to Faiz Muhammad ,on of Ladha, about a month later, the actual vendees, namely, Faiz Muhammad, Allah Ditta and others criminally trespassed into this land and assaulted its occupants, namely, Ilahi Bakhsh and others. In this assault eight persons belonging to Ilahi Bakhsh's party were injured while four persons belonging to the assailant's party suffered injuries with blunt weapon. One of the injured Ilahi Bakhsh died as --a result of the injuries after five days of the alleged occurrence, whereupon the case was converted to one under section.302. P. P. C.

3. Faqir Muhammad and others were riot satisfied with the investigation of the local police: and complained to the Inspector----General of Police, West Pakistan; Lahore., for the transfer of the investigation to some independent agency- The Inspector-General of Police transferred the investigation to the Crimes Branch, West Pakistan. The Crimes, Branch investigated the matter and the D. I.-G. Vide- his letter, dated the 31 of October 1969, directed the Superintendent of Police, Muzaffargarh, that both the parties should be challaned so that they could have a fair chance to adjudicate their viewpoints in the Court of law.

2. The Investigating Officer, who is present along pith the record., hit, shown me the statement of Ilahi Baksh under section 161. Cr. P. C., recorded by the Investigating Officer, wherein he stated that Faqir Muhammad and Farz Muhammad were his assailants. He stated that in the cross-case all the accused are on bails.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that according to the revenue record. The actual phys;cal possession of the property in dispute was of Faqir Muhantmad and that the: opposite- party was the aggressor. There are two versions of the matter and it is difficult ax this stage to determine who was the aggressor and who was aggressed. Of course, it is within the domain of the trial Court to determine, but or thing cannot be lost sight of that a counter case under section 307, P. P. C- has been registered against the opposite-party and that the accused also suffered injuries in the conflict. All these circumstances undoubtedly can be taken notice of in the matter of granting or refusing bail. In the entire circumstances it can be said that the case of the petitioners is covered by section 497(3), Cr. P. C., except Faqir Muhammad who has beers specifically named by the deceased as one of his assailants. According the bail' application ofFaqir Muhammad is dismissed. The other applicants, namely, Allah Ditta, Allah Bakhsh. Muhammad Nawaz, Meraj Hussain, Ghulam Hussain, Talib llus.Au, Muhammad Nawaz, Fazal Ahmad, Rahim Bakhsh and Muhammad Yar are admitted to bail in the sum of Rupees ten thousand each, with one surety each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A. D. M., Leiah.