MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Versus THE STATE
ORDER
1. The learned counsel for the applicant states that the version as given in the F. I. R. shows that there was a sudden fight and in the said fight only one injury is alleged to have been given by the applicant to the injured. Furthermore, according to the learned counsel, the injury sustained was a simple injury, otherwise injured would have been confined to hospital, the medical certificates do not show, that the injured has suffered a grievous injury, except the opinion of the medical officer concerned described the injury in question as a grievous injury. Learned counsel further submitted that taking into consideration the facts as disclos ed in the F. I. R. the question of applicability of the provisions of section 307, P. P. C. does not arise at all. In view of this, learned counsel submitted that this is a fit case for grant of bail, as the applicant has remained in custody for over 6 months and he is aged about 19 years and the trial has not yet commenced.
2. The learned Assistant Advocate‑General for the State does not oppose the above application in view of above facts, specially as a narration of the incident as given in the F. I. R., prima facie does not attract the provisions of section 307, P. P. C.
3. I have carefully considered the above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the fact, that there was a sudden quarrel in which the incident in question is alleged to have been taken place and only one injury has been received by the injured and furthermore A the medical certificates do not disclose any basis for the opinion given by the doctor, that the injury suffered by the injured was a grievous one, the question whether the injury suffered by, the complainant was a grievous injury, would require further inquiry at the stage of trial when the prosecution produces evidence in support of the said fact. The applicant has remained in custody for over 6 months and the trial has not yet commenced. Keeping in view all these facts, I allow the above application and direct that the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 15,000 (Fifteen thousand), with P. R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
4. Bail allowed.
Cited by 2 cases
- MUHAMMAD NAEEM vs THE STATE 1992 MLD 260
- THE STATE vs AZIZ alias ABDUL AZ1Z 1985 PLD Karachi 27