' SALMAN ANSARI, J.---This bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant/accused Waheedullah who was arrested for being named by the complainant Dilbar Khan who lodged F.I.R.
581 of 2008 on 9-11-2008 in the case under section 324/34, P.P.C. With Police Station Sohrab Goth.
2. Facts according to the F.I,R. Are that at about 1200 noon while complainant was unloadng stones from a truck at Mohammadi Goth, TCF School, Scheme No,33, Karachi when Sher Zada, Waheedullah (present applicant). Awal Khan and Bakht Zada came there and opened fire at the complainant who received firearms injuries on his back. He fell down, his statement was recorded at the hospital by ASI Sikandar Ali and a case as mentioned above was registered against the accused/applicant. A further statement according to the contents of Challan was recorded by the Investigating Officer in which the complainant instead of naming all the 4 accused as given in the F.I.R. Only implicated applicant who had shot at the complainant due to enmity as complainant's mother had a eloped with applicant about 25 years ago. The police allegedly recovered weapon from the applicant, the complainant was shown to have three gunshot wounds, two of them being entry and other one of exit.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for applicant that statement of the complainant by itself would make this case of further enquiry as complainant has exonerated other three accused in his subsequent statement which has alai been mentioned in the Challan and the weapon has been.
Foisted upon the applicant. There no independent witnesses of recovery, but both the witnesses are police officials, hence case would require further enquiry to determine the guilt of applicant and till such time he may be released on bail. In support of his contention learned counsel for applicant relied on 1980 SCM R 784 (Jaffar and others vs. The State).
4. Learned State counsel has opposed the bail application on the ground that there is sufficient evidence to implicate the applicant and motive of crime being established as the applicant had confessed before the police to have committed crime to avenge dishonour suffered due to complainant having eloped with his mother 25 year ago.
5. Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned counsel appearing for the State and perused the material placed on record.
6. In this case the complainant had named 4 persons in his statement after the incident but subsequently he has exonerated three other accused persons who have not been challaned in this case but only applicant. Both witnesses of recovery are also police officials.
7. Under the circumstances, as the statement of the complainant has been altered to the extent as mentioned above I find the case would require further enquiry to determine the guilt of the applicant, hence I allow this bail application. Let applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,50,000 and executing P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.