' SABIHUDDIN AHMED, J.--- This petition is directed against the order of the High Court of Sindh, dated 30-6-2008 whereby the petitioner was refused bail in Sessions Case No,130 of 2007 containing the allegations for committing offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 324, 504 and 337-A(i), P.P.C. While his two co-accused were admitted to bail.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and learned Prosecutor-General on behalf of the State and have also gone through the record. Two F.I.Rs,, one by the petitioner himself and the other by cousin of the deceased in respect to the same incident containing the version of the complainant party were registered. Reading the counter-version in juxtaposition with each other, the existence of a quarrel over money leading to raising of tempers and use of fire-arms by both parties appear to be acknowledge. It also appears to have been acknowledged that it was the complainant party, which went to the spot where the petitioner and his companions were already working. Apparently both the parties were involved in the same business i,e, excavating water channels leading to the sea. Apart from the statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. a statement of the deceased brother Rehmatullah Khan, an accused in F.I.R. No,69 of 2007 and an eye-witness of the incident, made before a Magistrate has also been recorded. In the said statement the aforesaid Rehmatullah .Khan has stated that the petitioner and his brother were not allowing the complainant party to operate machines in the area where the former were already excavating. He has further stated that the deceased had asked the petitioner either to allow the machines to operate on the same site or to pay Rs,2,50,000 which the deceased and his partners owed a contractor. Apparently, tempers ran high in the course of argument leading to a sudden fight between the parties equipped with fire-arms.
3. Indeed, the ground that prevailed with the Courts below in declining bail to the petitioner was the fatal injury to the deceased was caused by a bullet allegedly fired at by the petitioner through his pistol. Nevertheless, it could not be said that this was a case of premeditated cold-blooded murder. It is yet to be determined that to which of the party was the aggressor and whether capital punishment or that of imprisonment for life could be awarded in the circumstances.
4. All the accused persons from both the sides have already been granted bail at one stage or another. Taking all factors into consideration coupled with the fact that the petitioner has already remained in custody for more than a year we are inclined to think that the concession of bail may also be extended to him Accordingly, we would convert this petition into an appeal and admit the petitioner to bail in the sum of Rs,5,00,000 to the satisfaction of the trial Court.