ARSHAD MEHMOOD and anothers vs SARFRAZ and others

' MIR HAZAR KHAN KHOSO, J.---On the complaint of Arshad Mehmood (Cr. Petition No.155 of 1995) respondent Sarfraz (Cr.P. No.155/1995), Muhammad Feroze (Cr.P.No.159/95) and three other persons were booked for offences under sections 302/324/148/149 and 337-F (ii), P.P.C. At Police Station Dhudial, District Chakwal, vide F.I.R. No.50 dated 15-5-1995.

2. On medical ground Sarfraz succeeded in getting bail from the High Court on 16-10-1995. By the same order Muhammad Feroze was declined concession of bail by the High Court. Arshad Mehmood (Petition No.155/95) has sought for leave to appeal for cancellation of bail of Sarfraz, whereas Muhammad Feroze (Petition No.159/95) has sought for leave to appeal for grant of bail.

We are inclined to dispose of both the abovesaid matters by this single Order. As the matter does not require appreciation of evidence, we do not feel it necessary to reproduce or touch the merits of the case. Medical Officer, District Headquarters Hospital, Jhelum has certified that Sarfraz was unable to perform any work by right hand due to deformity of fingers and painful shoulder. The High Court held him of unsound physique and observed that his participation in the alleged occurrence and inflicting injury with weapon of offence needed specific evidence and material on record. The abovesaid observations of the High Court are based on the medical certificate issued by the Medical Officer, D.H.Q. Hospital, Jhelum. It cannot be said to have been made on extraneous circumstances. We are, therefore, not inclined to interfere with it. Petition of Arshad Mehmood as such stands dismissed. Leave to appeal to him is refused.

3. In respect of Muhammad Feroze Medical Officer has certified that he is old man of about 75 years with poor physique and general hygienic condition etc. The medical officer has opined that his treatment in jail was not possible due to lack of specific facilities required for such patients. It seems that the High Court has not taken into consideration the opinion of the Medical Officer. It is reflected from the order itself. For ready reference the relevant observations of the High Court as reproduced hereunder:- "As far as the case of Feroze is concerned, as per contentions of the learned counsel for the complainant, he is the principal accused of the occurrence. On his instance this occurrence had taken place. He, with his weapon of offence caused injury on the person of the deceased. In view of the above, I see no merit for grant of bail in his case. As such, bail petition to his extent is dismissed."

' In our view the old age of petitioner Muhammad Feroze, the ailments he is suffering from are sufficient to extend him concession of bail. We are, therefore, inclined to convert the petition into appeal and order for release of appellant Muhammad Feroze on bail subject to furnishing surety to the tune of Rs.50,000 (Rs. Fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.