' SALMAN ANSARI, J.---This bail application has been moved on behalf of applicants/ accused Abdul Hameed son of Abdul Rahim and-Abbas son of Abdul Rahim.
' Briefly the prosecution case is that on 16-6-2008 at 2300 hours an incident took place in which one Shahzad received injuries and on 17-6-2008 F.I.R. Was lodged after recording 154, Cr. P.C. Statement at, the Civil Hospital, of Azam brother of Shahzad. The statement is as under:-- "I am residing as above mentioned address and doing business of Scrap. On 16-6-2008 at 11 hours night, when I along with my elder borther Saleem Shahzad and uncle Shahbaz were standing at Akhara Building, Nishter Road land were busy in talking then our neighbours namely 1. Ghulam Qadir,
2. Haji Qasim son of Abdul Rahim,
3. Abdul Hameed son of Abdul Rahim and 4. Abbas son of Abdul Rahim came to us and there is transaction of amount between us. Ghulam Qadir and Haji Qasim demanded amount from my brother Saleem Shahzad and then they all became angry and started beating to my brother Ghulam Qadir and Haji Qasim took out their T.T. Pistols and fired on my brother Saleem Shahzad and due to reason my brother Saleem Shahzad became injured and fell down. Locality peoples were gathered there. I took my brother Saleem Shahzad to the Civil Hospital on the motorcycle. My claim is against the four accused persons who for the intention of killing fired on my brother and injured him."
' Both the applicants/accused were arrested and their bail applications were rejected by the learned Ist Additional District and Sessions Judge, Karachi South on the ground that in view of the role attributed to the applicants/accused they had with common intention committed the murder of Saleem Shahzad.
' The learned counsel for the applicants/accused has argued that though both the applicants/accused have been named in the F.I.R. But they are alleged to have beaten up the deceased along with co-accused Ghulam Qadir and Haji Qasim but the medical report shows no injury which can be attributed to the deceased having been beaten up. All the injuries are shown to have been inflicted by firearms which injuries have been attributed to Ghulam Qadir and Haji Qasim in the F.LR. The case under the circumstances requires further inquiry hence bail be allowed.
The learned counsel has relied upon 1995 SCMR 343, Rafiq Khan v. The State, PLD 1999 (Lah) 74, Abdul Manan c Billa v. The State and 2008 SCMR 1488 Ali Sheharyar v. The State.
' The learned State Counsel has opposed the bail application as according to her accused haye been named in the F.I.R. And are shown to have come with the intention to commit murder of the deceased, Shahzad who had received five gun shot injuries and had succumbed to the injuries at the hospital.
Having heard the arguments. In the matter although both the applicants/accused have been named in the F.I.R. Yet all the injuries received by the deceased Shehzad are gun shot injuries, in PLD 1999 (Lah) 74, where the accused was shown not to have taken part in an incident which murder was committed his case was found to be one of further inquiry and the accused was admitted to bail. In 1995 SCMR 343, the role of raising lalkara was attributed to the accused who was granted bail. Similarly in 2008 SCMR 1448, tentative assessm ent of the material on record had created some doubt about the person responsible ..For the injuries. Accused was admitted to bail under the circumstances, in the present case I find that the role of both the applicants/accused would under the circumstances require further inquiry to determine whether they had common intention to commit the murder of deceased Shahzad, hence 1 allow bail application. The applicants/accused be released on bail on their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees One Lac) each and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.