' MUHAMMAD ATHAR SAEED, J.---This Criminal Bail Application has been filed against the order of the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Malir Karachi, dated 31-7-2009 passed in Bail Application No,425 of 2009 relating to F.I.R. No,169 of 2009, under sections 324/427/34 P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Steel Town, Karachi.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant namely Khursheed Ahmed son of Din Muhammad had lodged the F.I.R. No,169 of 2009 in Police Station Steel Town at 2210 hours on 2-6- 2009, for an incident which occurred on that day, in which he had stated that while he along with his friends were going on their vehicle bearing No,APF-490, Maker Suzuki Liana, towards their home at about 3-00 p.m. At main Gulshan-e-Hadeed near KESC Colony one car coming from front side came near the vehicle of the complainant and stopped in front of their vehicle, from which five persons, in which the applicant has been named as third person, came out holding Kalashnikov and started firing upon them with intention to kill them. The complainant party reversed their vehicle and drove away.
3. According to the F.I.R. a bullet fired by the accused persons hit on the right side glass of the vehicle while one bullet hit Abdul Razzaque son of Ali Sher, sitting on the back seat, on his head, who was shifted to the hospital for treatment.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.G. Sindh.
5. The learned counsel for the applicant/accused stated that no medical report was submitted by the complainant party and there was unexplained delay of seven hours in registration of first F.I.R.
He further stated that there is no specific role assigned to the applicant and no enquiry has been made as to the genuineness of the F.I.R. He submitted that a political enmity is existing between the two groups in Gulshan-e-Hadeed area and the F.I.R. Has been lodged without the incident actually occurring. In this connection he drew my attention to the F.I.R. No,246 of 2008 registered at the same police station in which Fahad Soomro and Naveed Meerani, who have been stated to be accompanying the complainant in his vehicle have been shown as accused and he argued that this F.I.R. Has been lodged in retaliation of that F.I.R. He submitted that these points have not been considered by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge. The learned counsel, therefore, prayed for grant of bail to the applicant/accused.
6. The learned A.P.G. Has not seriously opposed the grant of bail in this case.
7. I have examined the case in the light of the above arguments of the learned counsel and have perused the record of the case including F.I.R. No, 246 of 2008 and the impugned order.
8. I have seen that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has observed that the name of the applicant has been mentioned in the F.I.R. With the specific role. I have perused the F.I.R. And could not locate as to in which part of this F.I.R. a specific role has been mentioned as far as the applicant is concerned. The assertion is general that the bullets were fired by the accused persons. I have also seen that there is no evidence that the back glass of the vehicle was damaged where the bullet hit it and there is no medical report of the injured person on record.
9. I am therefore, of the considered view that further inquiry is needed to connect the applicant/accused with the offence charged and he is entitled to bail. Consequently, the applicant/accused is admitted to bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) along with personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
10. The applicant is directed to cooperate with the trial Court and attend the proceedings before the trial Court failing which this concessions of bail may be withdrawn.
11. This Criminal Bail Application stands disposed off in the above manner.