2001 PLP 630 (MLD)

Accused Ameeruddin while coming there abused and asked the complainant as to why they were not vacating the house, on this the complainant replied that the house was sold by Ameeruddin, therefore, the complainant party will not vacate the same and he should not abuse the complainant party. On this Waheed Sahar fired from his gun with intention to kill the complainant party. The fire of Waheed hit Mst. Naimat, the mother of complainant, who fell down after crying, the complainant raised the cries, which attracted Darya Khan the cousin of complainant and Mst Shah Khatoon, the aunt of complainant and Mst. Shah Khatoon W/o Kabul and Muhammad Loung, the maternal uncle of complainant came running to the house of complainant who were also fired by the accused persons with intention to kill them, they were also given lathies and sharp side hatchet blows in which Fayaz the brother of complainant, Darya Khan the cousin of complainant, Mst. Darya Khatoon, Mst. Shah Khatoon and Loung also received the injuries, the complainant also received the lathi injuries, the accused persons were entreated in the name of "Allah" then the accused persons went away abusing the complainant party. Then the complainant took the injured to police station and got the letter for the treatment and went to Radhan Hospital and did not register the case at the very moment, hence he lodged the present F.I.R. The Investigating Officer (A.S.I. Manzoor Ahmed) noted down the injuries of complainant Riaz Ahmed, Fayaz Ali, Mst. Niamat, Mst. Darya Khatoon, Mst. Shah Khatoon and Muhammad Loung, Mst. Niamat mother of the complainant succumbed to the injuries on 17‑6‑2000. During the course of investigation accused Peeral alias Pir Bux Saleem, Haji Manzoor, Orangzeb, Wali Muhammad, Aijaz and Haji Khamen were arrested on 25‑6‑2000, whereas accused Rahib Shabir alias Baboo and Iqbal alias Waheed were arrested on 5‑7‑2000. Accused Ameeruddin, Haji Gulsher and Sahib are shown as absconders in the charge‑sheet. The applicants/accused after having failed to obtain bail from the trial Court, have filed this application for bail for the redressal of their grievances saying that they have been involved falsely and, therefore, entitled to be enlarged on bail. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant Ameeruddin he is not assigned any overt act and there are general allegations against other co‑accused for in effective firing and they did not inflict any injuries to deceased Mst. Niamat, whereas Manzoor, Shabbir, Hajjan, Haji Khamen, Aijaz; Haji Gulsher, Wali Muhammad, Rahib, Sahib and Saleem are alleged to have inflicted hatchet and lathi injuries to P. Ws. Fiaz, Mst. Darya Khatoon, Darya Khan, Mst. Shah Khatoon, Loung and Riaz Ahmed. The said injuries are simple in nature, whereas the accused Waheed has fired at Mst. Niamat, the deceased. It is further contended by the learned counsel that counter‑F.I.R. was also lodged by the applicant Haji Peeral being Crl. No.79 of 2000 at the same police station under sections 337(A(1), 337‑F(i), 337‑A(ii), 337‑F(ii) Q.D.O. and 504, P.P.C. but it was disposed of and cancelled in (c) Class by the S.S.P., Dadu malafidely. On the other side learned Advocate for the complainant has stated that the incident of this crime has taken place in broad daylight, the accused being armed with guns, rifles, hatchet and lathies have caused the injuries to the complainant and P.Ws. and Mst. Niamat in consequence of the injuries expired on 17‑6‑2000. The counter‑F.I.R. has also been disposed of as false and accused are not entitled to be released on bail as the accused had come on the place of incident for the purpose of vacating the house. Mr. Gul Hassan Solangi for the State has opposed the grant of bail. According to the F:I.R., specific firing is attributed to Waheed who was armed with gun and fired at Mst. Niamat and other accused are alleged to have fired at P.Ws. whereas Manzoor, Shabbir, Hajjan, Haji Khamen, Aijaz, Haji Gulzar, Wali Muhammad, Rahib, Sahib and Saleem are attributed the role of causing hatchet and lathi blows to P.Ws. Fiaz, Darya Khatoon, Darya Khan, Mst. Shah Khatoon and Riaz which are simple in nature. The allegation against Peeral, Amir Bux and Orangzeb that they were armed with rifle, pistol and gun but they did not fire at deceased Mst. Niamat but alleged to have fired at P.Ws. but there is no injury on the any P.Ws. whereas applicant Amir Bux abused the P.Ws. who happens to be uncle of complainant. It is obvious that applicants/accused have not caused any injury to the deceased but it is attributed to the accused Waheed, therefore, applicants cannot be held responsible for murder of Mst. Niamat and question of vicarious liability cannot be decided at this stage as the applicants/accused and complainant party are inter‑related, therefore, it is yet to be determined which is the aggressor party. The injuries are also simple in nature. But by accepting the dictum as observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the following cases titled as Mehmood Akhtar v. Haji Nazar reported in 1995 SCMR 310, Mumtaz Hussain and 5 others reported in 1996 SCMR 1125 Attaullah and 3 others v. The State and another reported in 1999 SCMR 1320, Shoaib Mehmood Butt v. Iftikhar‑ul‑Haq and 3 others reported in 1996 SCMR 1654. In such circumstances I have no other option but to follow the law laid down by the Hon'ble Court and extend bail concession to the applicants. In this case the applicants/accused are not alleged to have caused any injuries to the deceased, the other applicants are alleged to have fired ineffectively and other applicants caused hatchet and lathi injuries to the P.Ws therefore, the concession of bail is extended as there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused are not guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for 10 years. In such circumstances, it is yet to be decided whether the accused in such circumstances have shared common intention with co‑accused who had caused death of the deceased needs further enquiry as provided by sub section (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Therefore, the applicants are hereby allowed bail in the sum of Rs.2 lacs with two sureties each and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. 'N.H.Q./P‑18/K Bail allowed