2004 P Cr (PLP)

The applicant Rustam alias Hoto is one of the accused who has been indicted in Crime No.94 of 2001 of Police Station Mehar for offence under sections, 302, 324, 147, 148, 149, 504 and 114, P.P.C. Applicant was arrested on 5-8-2001 and his case was challaned before the learned Sessions Judge, Dadu on 18-8-2001. Bail application moved by the applicant before the trial Court was dismissed vide order, dated 13-12-2001. According to the prosecution story, applicant along with co -accused Laloo alias Lal Bux, Nizam, Allah Dino and Sajjan is involved in an incident, which occurred on 14-7-2001 at 7-15 a.m. The allegations against the applicant are that at the time of occurrence he was armed with Lathi and had instigated co-accused to kill the persons from the complainant party as a result whereof co-accused Laloo fired with his pistol at Wazir and caused him fire-arm injuries, which eventually resulted in his death. Accused Laloo also fired with his pistol at Shabban and caused him fire-arm injuries, while accused Nizam caused hatchet blows to Wazir. No overt act has been attributed to the present applicant except the role of instigation. Mr. Nisar Ahmed Abro, learned counsel for the applicant contended that all accused are close relatives of accused Laloo and have been falsely implicated in the crime. The allegations against the applicant are only of instigation, which are yet to be judged as correct during the trial of the case and thus, applicant is entitled for the bail. In support of his contention, learned counsel placed reliance upon Mumtaz Hussain and others v. The State 1996. SCMR 1125; Muhammad Saddiq and another v. The State 1996 SCMR 1654 and Farzand Ali v. Taj and 2 others 2000 SCMR 1854. Mr. Ali Azhar Tunio, learned Assistant Advocate-General contended that since the applicant has accompanied other accused and instigated them, therefore, he is not entitled for the concession of bail. I have carefully considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel and perused the case record. The, applicant is stated to be an aged man and father of co-accused Sajjan. He was arrested on 5-8-2001 and since then he is in custody. The only role assigned to the applicant is that of instigation and even the prosecution did not dispute that the applicant though armed with Lathi did not play any active role in the commission of crime. The allegations of prosecution that the applicant instigated other accused are yet to stand the test of scrutiny at the time of trial and in such circumstances case of applicant needs further enquiry as to his guilt of instigation. In view of the above discussion and the case-law referred by the learned counsel, which is applicable to the present case, this application is allowed and applicant is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 (two hundred thousand) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./R-17/K Bail granted.