1990 PLP 1170 (MLD)

Muhammad Hamza Khan for Applicant. S. Sarfraz Ahmed Asstt. A. G. Sindh for Respondent. The applicant in this case is facing trial for offences under sections 307, 326, 353, 148 and 1.19, P. P. C. He was sent up for trial after investigation of FIR No. 4/89 recorded at Police Station, City, Hyderabad. According to the allegations made in the said FIR the applicant was one of the group of 15 or 20 persons who had started firing from narrow lane behind Kohinoor Cinema from the side of Bhai Khan Incline at Police party that was on patrolling duty. No one seems to have been injured as a result of such tiring and the cross‑firing in defence by police. Some other incident also came to the notice of the patrolling party whereby a police constable Ali Gohar received bullet injuries at the hands of some assailants. S. I. P. Munawar Hussain of police Station City Hyderabad after his round of patrolling duty registered this crime on 6‑4‑1989 at 8 p.m. The case was investigated and the applicant was arrested on 6‑10‑1989 and an unlicensed firearm loaded with 7 rounds was recovered from his possession. The applicant was thereafter sent up in both the cases to stand trial. The Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad by his order dated 21‑10‑1989 rejected the bail application of the applicant and thereafter the present application seeking bail has been filed before this Court. Mr. Muhammad Hamza Khan, Advocate for the applicant contends that only evidence against the applicant in the case is that he was allegedly identified by S. I. P. Munawar Hussain as one of the members of a group comprising 15 to 20 persons who had fired at the police party. Since nobody is said to have been injured from either side there can be no application of section 307, P. P. C. in this case. Out of the alleged offences the applicant is accused of committing non- bailable offence under section 307, P. P. C. in this case although nobody received any injury as a result of such firing. The applicant under the circumstances will be entitled to grant of bail. Mr. S. Sarfraz Ahmed, Assistant Advocate‑General opposing this application has argued that firing at police party has become common in city of Hyderabad and it is high time that strict view be taken in exercising discretionary power of granting bail. The applicant according to him was identified at the spot by a police officer and his name appears in the F. I. R. itself. The applicant absconded and could be arrested only after a period of 6 months and unlicensed firearm was also secured from his possession. These days a number of people move about freely in the city of Hyderabad indiscriminately firing at law enforcing agencies and the poor citizens of the town creating terror and panic for the peaceful and innocent inhabitants. People armed with deadly firearms move about freely shooting at innocent citizens without any rhyme or reason treating them to be clay pigeons as a matter of sport. Courts today arc expected to take note of such happenings and take strict view while exercising discretion in considering bail applications in such cases. The applicant is indeed accused of such a type of case and I am not inclined to grant him bail and his application is dismissed as such. It will however be open to the applicant to repeat his bail application before the trial Judge after some evidence is recorded in the case. The trial Judge shall ensure that the trial of the applicant commences within a period of 3 months from today. N.H.Q./1‑106/K Bail application dismissed.