SAID ANWAR Versus State

QAISER RASHID KHAN, J.--- The petitioners namely, Said Anwar, Raheem Dad and Gulzada, seek bail in case FIR No. 113 dated 01.07.2016 registered against them under sections 302/324/148/149, P.P.C. by Police Station Pattan District Kohistan, after being denied the said concession by the learned court below.

2. Allegations against the accused-petitioners are that they along with their co-accused had committed not only the murder of deceased Abdul Latif but also caused dagger injuries to Usama and Mehboob-ur-Rehman, hence the FIR ibid.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the accused-petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the case because fourteen persons have been nominated for the commission of the offence which is otherwise unbelievable; that the ocular evidence is in conflict with the site plan; then the injuries sustained by the injured as attributed to the accused-petitioners are simple in nature. He also contended that in respect of the same occurrence, another case FIR No. 118 dated 02.07.2016 under sections 337-iii/ 34, P.P.C. was also lodged by Imran (accused in the present case), who had sustained injuries along with his cousin and hence the case is one of cross version and it is yet to be determined as to who was the aggressor and who was aggressed upon and all these circumstances lead the case to one of further enquiry. In this respect reliance was placed by the learned counsel on the cases reported as "Muhammad Shahzad Siddique v. The State and another" (PLD 2009 SC 58) and "Banaras Shah v. The State and another" (2016 MLD 1995 Peshawar).

4. As against that, the learned Additional Advocate General assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposed the grant of bail and contended that the accused-petitioners along with their co-accused have been directly nominated in the FIR with specific role attributed to each one of them, wherein the present accused-petitioners have been attributed the active role of causing dagger blows to the two injured, hence they are not entitled to bail.

Arguments heard and the available record perused.

5. As the record unfolds, it was the complainant Gul Khan who reported about the occurrence as to how on 01.07.2016 he along with his brothers Abdul Latif and Mehboob-ur-Rehman and his son Usama had gone to the fountain situated near Power House Pattan for fetching water for Iftari when they came across the accused-party, numbering fourteen, who picked up a quarrel with them and gave them kicks and fists and hit them with stones while the other co-accused gave knife blows to Abdul Latif, who later on succumbed to the injuries. Similarly, another set of accused caught hold of Usama and accused-petitioner Raheem Dad gave him knife blow on his head while accused-petitioner Said Anwar gave him a knife blow on his stomach and accused-petitioner Gul Zada gave a knife blow to Mehboob-ur-Rehman after he was caught hold of by Rizwan Ullah.

6. The MLC reports, showing various injuries on the person of the injured, support the version of the complainant. The question at this stage is not the simple or grievous nature of injuries but as to the common intention of the accused-petitioners in resorting to such vicious attack on four unarmed persons with every one playing his own role. Thus, the accused-petitioners being prima facie involved in the commission of the offence are not entitled to bail and accordingly the present bail petition stands dismissed.

Before parting with this order, it is directed that any observations recorded in this order, being purely tentative in nature, shall in no way prejudice the proceedings before the learned trial Court where the case be decided strictly on its own merits after recording evidence.

WA/368/P Petition dismissed.