Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1209-B of 1983, decided on 11th July, 1983.

--- Ss. 325 & 320-Grievous injury-Whether dislocation of tooth a grievous injury-Held, dislocation can vary.

---- S. 325/355/148/149--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 497--Bail-Martial Law Authorities not yet taken cognizance of case-Whether Authorities going to try case or not cannot be ascertained--Held, application cannot be kept pending indefinitely-Accused behind bar for four months-Bail allowed.

M. Yaqoob Khan for Petitioner.

Sh. M. Zubair, A. A.G. for the State.

Ch. Qadir Bakhsh for the Complainant.

Learned counsel for the complainant submits that a brief adjournment be granted so as to obtain written intimation from the Military Authorities as to whether or not the Martial Law Authority would try this case. On the last occasion i.e., 28-6-1938 the case was adjourned due to the same prayer of Mr. S. M. Zubair, learned Assistant Advocate-General. He states today also that he has not yet obtained any written intimation from the Military Authorities so far. Since this is the position and according to the information provided by learned Assistant Advocate-General it cannot be ascertained if the Martial Law Authority is going to try this case or not, I am therefore, left with no other alternative except to proceed with the case on merits.

2. A case is registered against the petitioner alongwith others under section 325, 355/148/149, P. P. C. at Police Station Mamun Kanjan, Tehsil Samundari District Faisalabad on 24-2-1983. The petitioner was arrested in connection with this case on 18-3-1983. Ever since then he has been behind the bars. The allegation against him is that while he was armed with a -12 bore gun he along with other caused injuries to Allah Ditta and also dishonoured him. The part ascribed to the petitioner is that he gave a blow with the butt of the gun to Allah Ditta on his face and as a result a tooth of Allah Ditta was dislocated. It is argued by learned counsel that Allah Ditta in the instant case had received in all 6 injuries according to the medical evidence and the injury attributed to the present petitioner is fifth. It is stated in the 5th injury that there was dislocation of left lateral incisor tooth with injury of lower lip. But the Medical Officer has not stated that the injury was kept under observation or that it was a grievous injury. It is stated in the medical report that third injury was grievous and 4th was kept under observation whereas all the other injuries on the person of the Allah Ditta were simple in nature. From the medical evidence prima facie inference is drawn that the injury attributed to the present petitioner was simple in nature. Mr. S. M. Zubair, learned Assistant Advocate-General has taken, me through section 320, P.P.C. in which grievous injury has been defined and dislocation of tooth is also tin be considered as a grievous injury, but then the nature of dislocation can vary. Had it been a grievous injury in that sense, there was no reason why the Medical Officer did not state so in the medical report. In any case the co-accused of the petitioner who had been attributed simple injuries have already been admitted to bail. The other aspect is that the petitioner is behind the bars since March, 1983 i.e. from the date of his arrest. He moved an application for bail before this Court, namely, Criminal Miscel laneous No. 1062/B-83 and it was heard on 4-5-1983 and 17-5-1983 but it was dismissed in default and for non-prosecution on 17-5-1983 because it was pointed out by learned Assistant Advocate-General that the case had been referred to the Martial Law Authorities. Therefore, he has now again moved for the grant of bail and it has been stated before me that the matter is still referred to the Martial Law Authorities who have yet not taken cognizance of the same and it cannot be ascertained as to whether they are going to try this case or not. I cannot keep this application pending before me indefinitely and since the petitioner has already been behind the bars for almost four months, there is no reason why he should not be admitted to bail. I, therefore, admit him to bail subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rs. 10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Faisalabad. This petition stands disposed of.

S. D. G. Bail allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.