MUHAMMAD NAWAZ Versus STATE

ORDER

The petitioner is one of the accused in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.248/93, dated 9-7-1993 under sections 324, 337-A(i)(ii)(iii), 337-F(i), 148, 149, P.P.C. at Police Station Shad Bagh, Lahore.

2. According to the F.I.R., in brief, the petitioner is accused of having caused injury on the head of P.W. Muhammad Akbar with an iron bar. The parties were involved in a long-standing dispute regarding a plot of land, including civil litigation.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and the complainant were heard at length in respect of the contentions raised herein.

4. The learned counsel for the complainant vehemently argued for the dismissal of the present bail petition. In this respect submitted that the petitioner had caused an injury that had been declared to be "Shajjah-i- Hashimah" and the punishment for the same being upto ten years, the case is hit by the prohibitory clause. Further submitted that as the complainant party was in possession of the "stay" in respect of the disputed plot, therefore, the attempt by the accused to take forcible occupation thereof, resulting in the present occurrence, disentitles the petitioner to bail. Further submitted that mere presence of the counter-version shall not entitle the petitioner to bail as contended herein.

To support his contentions, the learned counsel for the complainant had relied upon 1986 P Cr. L J 2728, 1992 P Cr. L J 1378, 1990 M L D 1174 and 1975 S C M R 391. But the precedents relied upon are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the instant case and as such are of no avail, in opposing the present petition for bail.

5. However, admittedly, in the occurrence in question that had taken lace in the disputed plot of land, three persons from the accused side were injured and their injuries had been suppressed in the F.I.R. Furthermore, a counter-case was duly registered against the complainant party and the challan had been submitted to the Court in the said case, as in the instant case. Therefore, it is hereby observed that it is yet to be determined at the trial as to which party was aggressor. In addition thereto, as it was confirmed on behalf of the State that the petitioner is neither a previous convict nor a hardened criminal and he is no longer required by the police, therefore, it is hereby held that the petitioner is entitled to bail. In this respect strength is sought from P L D 1972 SC 81 and P L D 1972 SC 277, wherein it was held that neither the law is to be stretched in favour of the prosecution nor the bail is to be denied as punishment and that in fact, any doubt arising should be resolved in favour of the accused even' at the bail stage.

6. Therefore, the petitioner is hereby allowed bail in the sum of Rs.30,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A.C./Duty Magistrate, City, Lahore.

N.H.Q./F-121/L Bail granted.