ABID HUSSAIN Versus State Zafar Iqbal Chauhan , SAeed Ahmad

ORDER

IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.C., Abid Hussain, petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No. 87 of 2006, dated 22-3-2006 registered under sections 302, 324, 427, 148/149, P.P.C. at Police Station Saddar, Bhakkar on the statement of Ghulam Haider, the complainant.

2. The brief allegation against the petitioner as alleged in the F.I.R. is that on 22-3-2006 at about 7-00 p.m. the present petitioner made fire-shot from his Rifle Pump Action hitting on the back of Ghulam Hussain, brother of the complainant and other co-accused also caused fire-arm injuries on different parts of body of the deceased and other injured P. Ws. Hence, the F.I.R.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that it was night occurrence and an empty was recovered from the spot; that the alleged fire attributed to the petitioner on the back of the deceased could not be inflicted by him while standing on wrong side of the deceased, when he was driving the vehicle; that injuries Nos. 13 and 14 caused on the right side of chest and on the left side of back of chest were grazed wounds and opinion of the doctor regarding nature of these injuries is still under observation that whether these injuries were caused with fire-arm or not; that co-accused have been granted bail and the petitioner is also entitled for the concession of bail on the principle of consistency.

4. The learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this bail petition on the ground that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific role of fire-shot with his Rifle Pump Action hitting on the back of the deceased; that the petitioner along with co-accused had launched murderous assault upon the complainant party and committed ,heinous offence, which falls within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. that the recovery has been effected from the petitioner and report under section 173, Cr.P.C. has been submitted in the Court; that there is every likelihood of the conclusion of the trial in the near future and the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.

5. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record with due care and caution.

6. According to the contents of the F.I.R. the petitioner at the time of occurrence while armed with Rifle Pump Action fired upon the deceased hitting his back and indiscriminate firing was also attributed to the petitioner and his co-accused. According to the post-mortem report, deceased received as many as 16 injuries with fire-arms during the incident, who were got medically examined on the same night. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner touches upon the deeper merits of the case, which will be seen by the learned Trial Court after recording the evidence. The offence falls within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. and the petitioner has failed to make out a case for the grant of bail.

Resultantly, this application being devoid of any merits is hereby dismissed.

H.B.T./229/L Bail refused.