MUHAMMAD AFZAL Versus State

ORDER

FAZAL-E-MIRAN CHAUHAN, J.---- Petitioner-Muhammad Afzal seeks post-arrest bail, in case vide F.I.R. No.327, dated 8-11-2005, offences under sections, 324, 334, 427, 148 and 149, P.P.C. registered at Police Station, Miana Gondal, District Mandi Bahauddin, for the allegations that the petitioner along with his co-accused, while armed with fire-arms weapons, launched a murderous assault upon Bashir Ahmad, father of the complainant and thereby caused injuries to him, hence, this case.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that; the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case with mala fide intention by the complainant in connivance with local police. The petitioner was found innocent in the successive investigations, conducted by the police and a discharge report was prepared but the same was not accepted by the learned Illaqa Magistrate. As per F.I.R., only allegation against the petitioner is that of single shot, which hit on the right leg of Bashir Ahmad/victim, which is on non-vital part of the body. Further contends that co-accused of the petitioner has already been granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge; the role ascribed to the petitioner is identical in nature with his co-accused and rule of consistency is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the petitioner, which makes the case of the petitioner that of further inquiry into his guilt. Also contends that the petitioner is in incarceration since 27-1-2005 and his further detention in the jail would not serve any useful purpose, therefore, the petitioner deserves the concession of post-arrest bail.

3. Conversely, learned counsel for the complainant assisted by learned State counsel opposed the bail petition contending that the petitioner is specifically nominated in the F.I.R. with specific role of causing injury to the victim. The offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioner fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The challan has been submitted in the Court for trial and the same will be concluded within a shortest span, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.

4. Having given the profound consideration to arguments of counsel for the parties and perused the record, it depicts that as per F.I.R., the petitioner fired one shot with his .12 bore gun, pellet of which hit on the right leg of lower part of father of the complainant, which is on non-vital part. It reflects that the intention was to cause the murder or any grievous injury to injured/victim. The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest. He has been found innocent by the Investigating Officer. A discharge report was prepared and submitted before the learned Illaqa Magistrate, who did not agree with the same and directed the police to submit challan against the petitioner. The name of the petitioner was placed in Column No.2 of the challan. Though police opinion is not binding on the Court, but the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an indefinite period. Guilt of the petitioner will be determined by the trial Court after recording evidence. In such like cases, grant of bail is a rule and its refusal is an exception. Reliance is placed on Bashir Ahmad and 5 others v. The State PLD 1995 SC 34.

5. In this view of the matter, this bail petition is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac only) with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

H.B.T./M-161 Bail granted.