2011 YLR 2836 (PLP)

IMAM BUX BALOCH, J.

By this single order I would like to dispose of Bail Applications Nos.310 and 345 of 2011 together, as the F.I.R. is common in both the bail applications. Heard Mr.Achar Khan Gabole counsel for the applicants, Mr.Noor Hassan Malik Counsel for the complainant and Mr.Sardar Ali Shah Rizvi A.P.-G. for the State. The allegations contained in the F.I.R. are that the applicants along with co-accused Mehboob, Qurban, Shahmir, Ghulam Hussain, Kaloo, Pathan, Rabban, Aslam and Shabbir son of Jan Muhammad attacked upon the house of complainant and tried to kidnap Allah Rakhio cousin of the complainant but due to intervention of his sister-in-law Mst.Arbab Aunt Mst.Khanda wife of Khair Muhammad, accused Mehboob fired from his Kalashnikov which hit Mst.Arbab and accused Qurban fired upon Mst. Khanda which fire missed. Learned counsel for the applicants contended that no specific role has been attributed against the applicants in the F.I.R., only their mere presence is shown. He states that it is yet to be determined at the trial whether the applicants have shared common intention to principal accused Mehboob and that in such circumstances the case of the applicants falls under the-purview of further enquiry. He further states that after the arrest of the applicants no recovery was effected from them though according to F.I.R. they were armed with rifle and Kalashnikov. Learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon the following case-laws:- (1) 2008 YLR 2890(2) Lahore (Muhammad Ashraf v. The State and another). (2) 2007 YLR 2374 Karachi (Suhrab v. The State) (3) 2007 PCr.LJ 1848 Karachi (Muhammad v. The State). On the other hand Mr.Sardar Ali Shah Rizvi, learned A.P.-G. states that the applicants along with co-accused entered in the house of the complainant and in furtherance of their common intention accused Mehboob fired upon Mst. Arbab but saved Allah Rakhio from kidnapping at the hands of applicants. Resultantly principal accused Mehboob caused fire arm injury on the left leg of injured Mst.Arbab, and states that final Medico-legal certificate has not been issued by the Medico legal Officer as yet. On the other hand Mr.Noor Hassan Malik counsel for the complainant states that there is enmity in between the parties and the applicants along with co-accused have entered in the house of the complainant and tried to kidnap/abduct one Allah Rakhio but due to intervention of Mst. Arbab, accused Mehboob fired upon her who received fire arm injuries. He further states that all the accused are responsible for the act of main accused, as according to sections 148 and 149, P.P.C. every member of unlawful assembly is responsible for the act of individual. I have considered the submissions advanced at the bar and I have also gone through the case-law placed on record by the learned counsel for the applicants. Admittedly no specific role is attributed against the applicants in the F.I.R. that they were armed with lethal weapons but they have caused no injury to any person. It is also an admitted fact that after the arrest of applicants no recovery was effected from them during investigation. In the above circumstances, I am of the view that the case of the applicants falls under the purview of further enquiry as contemplated under section 497(2), Cr.P.C. Consequently, the applicants are granted bail subject to their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 each with P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court. Both the bail applications are disposed of. H.B.T./T-9/K?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.