1. ' IMAM BUX BALOCH, J.---Applicant Ghulam Muhammad Mashori is facing trial in crime No,02/2008, P.S. Khairpur Nathan Shah, for offences under section 302,147,148,149,114,504 P.P.C. Having failed to get bail from the trial Court the applicant has approached this Court for bail.
2. ' The allegation against applicant is that on 2-1-2008, he along with co-accused Nawab, Nisar, and Yaseen made fires from guns at father of complainant, resulting into his death. The motive behind this incident as disclosed in the F.I.R. Is dispute between parties over flow of water to the lands.
3. ' Learned counsel for the applicant contended that case of present applicant is, distinguishable from the case of other co-accused. He contended that allegation in the F.I.R. Against present applicant is that he along with other co-accused fired from their gun straight way on the deceased Shah Pasand, which hit on the left arm of the deceased. He contended that deceased has received one injury on his left arm. It is yet to be determined at the trial that who caused the injury because two persons have been alleged for one injury. He has relied upon case of Mehboob-ur-Rehman v.
4. The State (1996 PCr.LJ. 238), Muhammad Riaz v. The State (1994 PCr.LJ 149) and Namdar v. The State (2004 PCr.LJ 1836 Karachi). He submitted that in the light of above citations the applicant has made out a case of further inquiry and therefore he may be admitted to bail.
5. ' On the other hand Mr. Ghauri, learned counsel for complainant contended that all the accused with their common intention formed an unlawful assembly and have with pre-meditation committed the brutal murder of an old man having age of more than 61 years. He relied on the case of Sher Muhammad v. The State (2008 SCM R 1451). He further contended that present applicant alongwith others is jointly responsible for the murder of deceased and he vehemently opposed grant of bail.
6. ' Learned state counsel supported the arguments of learned counsel for the complainant and strongly opposed grant of bail to the applicant.
7. I have considered the submission advanced by learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the material available on record. During investigation, from place of vardat seven empty cartridges of ,12 bore were recovered, which indicate that all the co-accused along with applicant have jointly formed on unlawful assembly and caused, murder of deceased Shah Pasand. The postmortem report of the deceased confirms, allegations contained in the F.LR.
8. Against the present applicant.
9. ' In the case of Sher Muhammad (Supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the petitioner and co-accused were responsible for causing death of one Khadim Hussain, who was brother of the complainant. It is alleged that the petitioner had caused firearm injury on the left eye of the deceased and corroboration to this assertion was provided by postmortem report. Prima facie, there are grounds to believe that the petitioner is guilty of the offence he stands charged. No case for bail is made out.
10. ' The facts of the cases cited by the learned counsel for the applicant are distinguishable and are not applicable to the facts of the instant case. While facts of the case of Sher Muhammad (Supra) are at par with the instant case.
11. Having considered all the aspects of the case, I have come to the conclusion that the applicant has not made out a case for bail. Consequently, this bail application is dismissed. However, the learned trial Court B is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably with a period of six months after receipt of this order.