FARAN AHMED alias FARHAN Versus State

ORDER

MAZHAR IQBAL SIDHU, J.--- Faran Ahmed alias Farhan after having been sent in prison in a case registered vide FIR No. 230 dated 23.04.2015 under sections 337-L(2)-A-(iii)/147/149, P.P.C. at Police Station Ali Pur Chatha District Gujranwala has prayed his release till the final decision of the case through the instant application.

2. Prosecution accusal pithily is that petitioner while armed with hatchet along with co-accused Zaka- Ullah, Shahbaz Ahmad and some 7/8 unknown persons armed with clubs caused injuries to the complainant Muhammad Zaman.

3. Descriptively the role assigned to the petitioner is that he raised a lalkara, then caused a hatchet blow on the head of injured thereafter Shahbaz his co-accused gave a danda blow on his right hand then the injured fell to the ground thereafter all the accused caused him injuries with their respective weapons on different parts of his body.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prima facie offence under section 337-A(iii), P.P.C. is not made out whereas all other penal provisions are bailable; petitioner is in Jail since 29.06.2015; investigation is complete and application of section 337-N, P.P.C. may be invoked while deciding the bail application because the basic punishment under section 337-A(iii), P.P.C. is payment of Arsh i.e 10 % of the Diyat, however, an accused may be sentenced up to 10 years as Tazir; the quantum of sentence remains the discretion of the Court, therefore, in the circumstances petitioner deserves for the grant of bail.

5. Learned Additional P.G by scanning he record has opposed the submissions and argued that injured sustained 12 injuries; out of which injury No.1 as incised; the same is specifically attributed to the petitioner; examining doctor kept the nature of injuries Nos.1, 2, 3 and 10 under observation for X-Rays and C.T Scan of the brain of injured; the X-Ray report shows fracture of parietal bone; the head of the human body is very vulnerable and vital part of the body which has been selected by the petitioner; his role has been corroborated by the medical evidence, therefore, at this early stage the petitioner does not deserve the relief sought for therefore, application may be dismissed.

6. Arguments heard intently. Record perused.

7. Injuries 1, 2, 3 and 10 were kept under observations for their X-Rays and of C.T Scan of the Brain. Vide X-Ray report dated 20.04.2015 fracture of right parietal bone was seen; the injured was also subjected to C.T Scan. On the final result of injuries case was registered on 23.04.2015. No inordinate delay has been noticed in reporting the incident to the police. Even otherwise, it is a matter of common practice. Our police seldom registers a case well within the time for the best reason known to it or owing to mythomaniac. It may be within the context to mention the text of injury:

"Incised wound 4-1/2 cm x 1-1/2 cm bone exposed on top of right side of head. 8 cm from right ear. Fresh bleeding".

Then the X-Ray report speaks as fracture of right parietal bone. The quantum of sentence under section 337-A(iii), P.P.C. may extend to 10 years. Petitioner selected amongst the vital part of the body as head. Such like injury cannot be regarded maneuvered. The P.Ws. are tenacious to the allegations.

8. For what has been discussed above, the application fails to yield the result desired. The same stands dismissed.

HBT/F-36/L Bail refused.