' Petitioners Qurban Hussain alias Mirza and Murtaza Ali vide two separate petitions bearing Crl.
Miscellaneous Nos.421-B and 1181-B of 2004 respectively have sought for the relief of post-arrest bail in case No.396 dated 25-8-2002 under sections 302/148/149 , P. P . C . Registered with Police Station, Saddar Pakpattan Sharif.
2. As both these petitions have arisen out of one and the same case, hence are being disposed of by this single order.
3. The facts of the case stood mentioned in the order dated 7-10-2003 of my learned brother Nasim Sabir, J., passed in post-arrest bail petition (Cr1. Miscellaneous No.2355-B of 2003) titled Muhammad Amir v. The State. The same therefore, are not repeated here.
4. Before proceeding further, I would like to mention here that my said learned brother has dealt with the bail petitions of the co-accused of the oresent petitioner. He is not available here these days. I, therefore, proceed to decide these petitions.
5. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner Qurban Hussain alias Mirza that he has been ascribed solitary fire shot to deceased Mst. Sakina Bibi and that too on the non-vital part of her body; that he is 14 years of age as per his school leaving certificate; that it is a case of two versions and hence further probe is needed into his guilt; and that he is behind the bars and previous, non- convict.
6. As regards Murtaza Ali petitioner, it has been contended that he is not named in the F.I.R. That mere ineffective firing is attributed to him, that his case is identical to his co-accused Muhammad Amir, who has been allowed bail vide the order dated 7-10-2003 in bail petition (Crl. Miscellaneous No.2355-B of 2003) titled Muhammad Amir v. The State, and that he is behind the bars and previous non-convict.
7. Conversely, the learned counsel for the State has opposed the petitions on the ground that petitioner Qurban Hussain alias Mirza has been ascribed fatal shot to deceased Mst. Sakina Bibi; and that they have also killed their two persons in order to falsely implicate the complainant party.
8. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides with the help of the available record.
9. As regards petitioner Qurban Hussain alias Mirza, he has been ascribed fatal injury to Mst. Sakina Bibi deceased. The grant of bail on the basis of minority is always discretionary with the Court. In view of the role ascribed to him, I am not inclined to admit him to bail at this stage. His petition (Crl.
Miscellaneous No.421-B of 2004), therefore, is dismissed.
10. As regards Murtaza Ali petitioner, he is not named in the F.I.R. He has been ascribed only ineffective firing. His case is identical to that of his co-accused Muhammad Amir, who has been enlarged on bail vide the aforesaid order dated 7-10-2003. The rule of consistency, therefore, comes into play in his case.
11. In these circumstances, I have been persuaded to enlarge him on bail. His petition (Crl.
Miscellaneous No.1181-B of 2004), therefore, is accepted and he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees on lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.