1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL SOOMRO, C.J.---By this order I intend to dispose of the above Cr. Bail Application arising out of Crime No,65 of 2006 registered at Police Station Rustam for offence under sections 302/324/148/149, P.P.C.
2. ' The case of prosecution in nutshell is that on 2-11-2006 at about 1740 hours, complainant Mr. Sadoori lodged report at Police Station Rustam, District Shikarpur, stating therein that her family has dispute with Atrani Jatoi's tribe, due to that both sides killed so many persons of each other.
3. She further stated that on the aforesaid day she along with her cousin Ali Bait alias Chutto son of Punhoon aged about 50 years and other people namely Ali Murad son of Gul. Sher Soomro son of All Baig, Sehar Khanani Jatoi were going to the lands of Dr. Ibrahim Jatoi for harvesting the rice crop. When at about 12-00 noon accused Zaman son of Arbab, Aluaddin Raja son of Tharo, Manthar, Lakhmeer son of Mubarak, Kalati son of Jhangal son of Kalati Mubarak @ Wango son of Shahmeer, Ali Haider son of Kero @ Khamiso Ghulam Nabi son of Lakhmeer. Muhammad Rafiq @ Baboo, Muhammad Nawaz son of Zaharullah, Ali Bagi son of Ghafoor, Angali son of Kalati, Darhoon son of Hann, Mureed son of Kero, Lagro Ramzan son of Gald Mahmoob son of Lakhmeer, Moula Bukhsh son of Zahrullah, Mumtaz son of Mubarak, Ameer Bakhsh son of Arbab, Jagan son of Hatim, all by caste Atrani Jatoi residents of Tharo Jatoi, all were duly armed with Kalshinkoves and rifles came and gave hakals that they are enemies they do not spare and murder them. Thereafter the culprits opened straight fires on the complainant party to which they raised cries of murder, on which co-villagers attracted to the place of incident. It is further alleged that on seeing the villagers the accused persons made their escape good. During the such firing cousin of complainant fall down while crying and complainant also received fire-arm injury on her right shoulder. Later on the complainant and villagers saw that cousin of complainant namely Ali Baig alias Chutto who received fire-arm injuries on his abdomen and has succumbed to his injuries. The complainant after leaving the witnesses over the dead body left for making complainant to her Neckmards who advised her to register such F.I.R. The complainant then lodged the F.I.R. At the concerned police station.
4. ' The applicant having apprehension of his arrest, filed Criminal Bail Application No,229 of 2007 before this Court for grant of pre-arrest bail and vide order, dated 12-4-2007 this Court granted pre-arrest bail to the applicant. On 30-8-2007 the above bail application was fixed for confirmation or otherwise, whoever, counsel for the applicant could not reach in time as well as the applicant, though was present, but could not appear before the Court as such the aforesaid bail application was dismissed for nonprosecution and the interim order was recalled. Hence the applicant moved his present bail application, repeating the same prayer.
5. ' It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that on the relevant date viz. 30- 8-2007 when the previous bail application was fixed for confirmation or otherwise, the counsel for the applicant could not come in time as he was coming from Hyderabad, further more the applicant though was present in the Court, but could not hear his name properly, as such the dismissal of previous bail application of the applicant was due to misunderstanding. It has further been contended that the applicant has nothing to do with the incident but has only been implicated in order to get revenge from him. The learned counsel further added about 21 persons were nominated as accused duly, armed with K.Ks. And rifles who are alleged to have fired on the complainant party but even then from such indiscriminate firing of 21 persons the complainant only received a bullet on her shoulder and she was remained safe which fact does not appeal to a prudent mind. It has also been added that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant, as it has not been motioned that as to whose fire hit the deceased or the complainant. Learned counsel further averred that the police is bent upon to arrest the applicant in order to humiliate and disgrace him in collusion with the complainant party and the prosecution case on the face of it appears to be false on account of admitted enmity between the parties as the complainant party murdered the uncle of applicant and an F.I.R. Being Crime No,46 of 2007 was lodged by accused party against the complainant party.
6. ' Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State conceded the grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant.
7. ' I have heard the learned counsel for respective parties and perused the record made available before me.
8. ' The bare reading of F.I.R. Of the present case, reveals that the applicant along with 21 persons were nominated in the F.I.R. And they all are alleged to have fired directly upon the complainant party in which the complainant received fire-arm injury on her right shoulder whereas her cousin Ali Baig alias Chutto who is said to have sustained fire-arm injuries on his abdomen and has succumbed to his injuries. The perusal of F.I.R. Does not disclose any specific role against any of the accused couple with the applicant. The record further reveals that the applicant's party had lodged an F.I.R.
9. Being Crime No,46 of 2006 against the complainant party in respect of murder of uncle of applicant. In the said F.I.R. Dr. Ibrahim Jatoi was nominated as one the accused and the present applicant has been . Shown as witness. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has enmity with Dr. Ibrahim Jatoi and at his instance the applicant has been involved in the present case. This contention of learned counsel has force for the reiasons that complainant has averred in her F.I.R. That she informed the incident to her Nekmard and on his advised the F.I.R. Was lodged.
10. Said Dr. Ibrahim Jatoi is the Nekmard of the complainant and the present F.I.R. Was lodged at his instance/advise, therefore false implication 'of the applicant in this case cannot be rule out. In this regard I am fortified with the case reported in PLD 1997 SC 194 in which the Honourable Apex Court has held that motivation of police on political consideration amounts admission of accused on pre-arrest bail.
11. ' For the aforementioned reasons I am of the view that applicant has made out a case for grant of pre-arrest bail. Resultantly, interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant vide order, dated 7-9- 2007 is confirmed on the same terms and conditions.
12. ' Cr. Bail Application stands disposed of.