BASHIR AHMAD Versus State
ORDER
KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.--- It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he along with his three brothers and father has been falsely implicated in this case; that only allegation against him is that he gave three sota blows on the person of complainant which hit him on his arm, head and forehead; that he did not touch the deceased; that complainant had mentioned in the F.I.R. that co-accused real brother of petitioner Iqbal received injury from the hand of Abdul Haq who had fired at Amjad Saeed real brother of complainant which after piercing body of said Amjad Saeed hit Muhammad Iqbal co-accused who had held the deceased in Japha. Learned counsel for the petitioner drawn my attention to the diagram mentioned in the post-mortem report, which just has now been produced in the Court and submits that it could not have been caused by Abdul Haq. Further submits that same cannot hit Muhammad Iqbal after it hit on the person of Amjad Saeed deceased and that case of petitioner is of further inquiry falling under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. coupled with the fact that petitioner had filed a private complaint in which process has not been issued against the complainant party.
2. On the other hand learned counsel for the complainant submits that there are five accused in this case out of which three accused along with their father are proclaimed offenders; that the occurrence had taken place on 18-12-2005; that petitioner was also declared proclaimed offender and ultimately he was arrested on 30-4-2006; that injury on Iqbal accused has been explained; that challan has been filed and case is fixed for evidence tomorrow.
3. Learned State Counsel submits that only allegation against him is that he caused injuries to the complainant and did not touch the deceased.
4. Heard. Petitioner is named in the F.I.R. He along with his co-accused not only committed the murder of the deceased but also caused injuries on the person of the complainant and other injured P.Ws. There is one deceased and three injured P.Ws. All injured P.Ws. have fully implicated the petitioner in their statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. Petitioner remained proclaimed offender and ultimately was arrested on 30-4-2006. His two co-accused along with Abdul Haq main accused are still at large and have been declared proclaimed offenders. The case if fixed for evidence for tomorrow. The complaint filed by the petitioner is in progress but still no process has been issued against complainant party. As far as contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner that injury on the person of Iqbal co-accused could not have been caused as has been mentioned in the F.I.R. is concerned, the same cannot be discussed in this bail petition because it is a matter of evidence and the learned Trial Court shall determine the same after recording the evidence of both the parties. In this view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that petitioner along with his co-accused with their common object committed the murder of deceased Muhammad Afzal and caused injuries to the complainant and other injured P.Ws: In this view of the matter, no case for bail is made out. This petition stands dismissed.
H.B.T./B-6/L Bail refused.