SHIRAZ AHMAD Versus STATE

The petitioner who is involved in a case under section 324/34, P. P. C. arising out of F.I.R. No.322, dated 17‑11‑1993, registered at Police Station Bhalwal, seeks to be admitted to bail.

2. The petitioner is alleged to have fired at Malak Dad with a pistol, whereas his co‑accused too fired at the Malak Dad with his .12 bore gun, as a result of which Malak Dad received injuries.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that co‑accused of the petitioner, Nadeem was found innocent; hence the case against the petitioner is also one of further inquiry; as the police has not believed the version given in the F.I.R. itself. He further contended that according to the prosecution evidence the petitioner caused two injuries with .30 bore pistol, whereas according to the medical evidence, there are four entry‑wounds which are of the same dimension i.e. 1 cm x 1 cm, which belies the prosecution version as it shows that same type of weapons were used for causing these injuries and probably these injuries are with pellets and not with bullets as shown in the evidence; hence on this score alone, the case against the petitioner is one of further inquiry and that case of the petitioner does not fall within the ambit of section 324, P.P.C. in view of nature of injuries sustained by the injured P.W.

4. Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from the Police Officer, has opposed this application on the ground that the petitioner twice opened the fire on the injured P.W. which shows his intention, thus the case against him falls within the ambit of section 324, P.P.C.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner relate to deeper appreciation of evidence and this exercise cannot be done at the bail stage. He further submitted that the injured P.W. received injuries with fire‑arm, which clearly makes out a case punishable under section 324, P.P.C.; hence that petitioner is not entitled to the grant of bail.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

Admittedly the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner have some weight as the injuries found on the person of the victim are of same dimension which to some extent makes the prosecution case doubtful. In view of the language of section 324, P.P.C. when the injury is caused, then the offender is liable for the injury caused. The case against the petitioner falls in the second part of section 324, P.P.C. as none of the injuries is so serious so as to entail punishment of ten years. In the circumstances, the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 (fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A.C. Bhalwal.

H.B.T./S.434/L Bail granted.