Petitioners Zafar and Sher Zaman by way of the instant petition have prayed for post-arrest bail in case FIR No, 220 registered under Sections 302/324/148/149 PPC with Police Station Jandanwala, District Bhakkar on 11.11.2009.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as per the FIR is that on 11.11.2009 at about 02:00 p.m. Saif Ullah and others, having fire-arms, in prosecution of the common object of the unlawful assembly formed by them, have committed the Qatal-e-Amd of Mst. Kanizan Bibi and attempted the Qatal-e-Amd of Mst. Farzana Bibi, by firing on them with their respective weapons.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that according to the FIR, mere ineffective firing is attributed to them. No role qua the deceased or the said injured is ascribed to them. The question, thus of their vicarious liability for the Qatal-e-Amd of the deceased and the attempt to commit Qatal-e-Amd of Mst. Farzana Bibi is to be gone into at trial.
4. Their case, therefore, is covered within the mischief of sub-section (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C. calling for 'further inquiry into their guilt.
5. They are behind the bars and stated to be previous non-convicts, which has not been controverted by the other side. However, it has been argued by the side of the complainant that their trial has commenced and so, at such a stage, it may not be appropriate to enlarge them on bail.
6. I am afraid that perhaps such submission is not tenable in view of the case of Muhammad Ismail Vs. Muhammad Rafique and another (PLD 1989 Supreme Court 585). It has been held by their Lordships in that case that when case of an accused may, otherwise, be found fit for bail, then mere commencement of trial cannot come as clog in the way of the same.
7. I, therefore, accept this petition and admit them to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
8. However, it is hereby clarified that the above observations are tentative in nature and meant only for the disposal of the matter in hand. These shall have no bearing at all on anybody's case at trial.