1. ' MRS. QAISER IQBAL, J.---This is an application for suspension of sentence filed by the appellants Rizwan son of Muhabat Brohi and Murad son of Shamir Brohi, through the impugned judgment they were awarded life imprisonment for committing murder of deceased Shoaib Hameedi, as well as convicted under section 337-L(2) P.P.C. And sentenced each of them to suffer R.I. For one year and to pay Daman of Rs,5000. However, benefit of section 382-B was also extended.
2. ' Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the incident had taken place in the dark hours of night, the appellants were identified by the prosecuting witnesses in the torch light.
3. Deceased Shoaib Hameedi, had sustained firearm injury as per post mortem report. From the possession of the appellant Rizwan recovery of the crime weapon was not effected, while recovery of the crime weapon effected from the possession of the appellant Murad was disbelieved by the trial Court, therefore, only evidence available on record comprising of interested witnesses coupled with the medical evidence has not been believed by the trial Court as against co-accused accused Muhammad Nawaz and Ashiq Ali, they were acquitted by extending benefit of doubt. It has further revealed from the impugned judgment that in connection with the appellants Rizwan and Murad, trial Court has observed that they were responsible for causing firearm shot resulting in the death of deceased Shoaib Hameedi, yet it could not be held with certainty as to which one of the accused caused fire arm injuries to the deceased. It is contended by Mr. Syed Madad All Shah, learned counsel for the appellants that this factum itself creates doubt as to which one of the appellant, was responsible for fatal injuries to the deceased.
4. ' Learned State counsel has opposed the application on the ground that sufficient evidence is available on record to connect the appellants in the commission of the crime therefore the appellants are not entitled to the relief claimed.
5. ' I have considered the arguments advanced at bar. The appellants even confined in the jail from last five years and five months, the observation of the trial Court, as a mitigating circumstance for awarding lesser punishment itself suggest doubt in the prosecution case coupled with the evidence recorded at the trial Court was disbelieved against co-accused Muhammad Nawaz and Ashiq Ali in relation to their identification in torch light; on the premises that the complainant had seen them at police station before holding identification.
6. ' I am inclined to extend concession of bail to the appellants at this stage which shall not hamper the appeal while heard and decided on merits.
7. ' Accordingly operation of the impugned judgment is hereby suspended, appellants are directed to be admitted on bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,100,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand) each and P.R bond to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of this Court with the direction that they should appear before this Court on each date of hearing pending disposal of the appeal. Put off to 22-11-2007.