1. ' MUHAMMAD TASNIM, J.---The applicant is booked in Crime No, 10 of 2011 under sections 302 and 34 P.P.C. Police Station Drighbala. Initially the applicant applied for bail before learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge Dadu who dismissed the bail application per order dated 12-9-2011. Against the aforesaid order present bail application has been filed.
2. ' The facts leading to this bail application are that complainant is zamindar and his otaq is situated at Surhiya Muhallah Dirgh city, and key of his otaq was lying with his nephew (sister's son) Abdul Jabbar. On 27-6-2011, complainant along with his brother Lutfullah and relative Abdullah Chandio went to K.N. Shah with some work and they became late, therefore, they went to Dirgh and stayed night there where Abdul Jabbar was already available. After taking night meal complainant and his relative Abdullah was chit chatting whereas Abdul Jabbar went out side in order to purchase cigarettes. It was 11-00 p.m, complainant heard noise in street therefore, went there, bulbs were glowing and on the light of bulbs complainant saw and identified accused (1) Idrees armed with gun (2) Mueen armed with pistol and one unidentified accused who was armed with hatchet.
3. Accused Mueen and unidentified accused were holding Abdul Jabbar and asked accused Idrees to commit his murder, in the meantime, accused Idrees fired upon Abdul Jabbar which hit him at his chest, then accused, persons went away. Complainant saw that Abdul Jabbar died at spot. P.W remained with dead body, complainant went to his village and informed, the incident to them, then lodged the above F.I.R.
4. ' Learned counsel for the applicant in support of the bail application has submitted that the applicant is complainant in F.I.R. No,9 of 2011 registered under sections 457, 380, 511 and 34 P.P.C. At Police Station Drigh Bala. On 28-6-2011 occurrence took place at 12-45 a.m and F.I.R. Was lodged on the same day i.e, 1680 hours. She says that F.I.R. Lodged by the present applicant was earlier in time and in self defence firing was made by the present applicant with which one Abdul Jabbar sustained injury and died on the spot. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is a case of counter version and it is yet to be decided which party was the aggressor. She says that applicant has not killed Abdul Jabbar with intention to commit his murder but it was in self defence, hence he may be enlarged on bail.
5. ' On the other hand learned Additional Prosecutor General Sindh has submitted that applicant is fully connected with the commission of offence and with his firing Abdul Jabbar sustained injury and died on the spot. Learned A.P.-G: says that version in is fully corroborated by the witnesses in their statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. Learned APG further says that F.I.R. Lodged by the present applicant has been disposed of under "C" class, He says that from the possession of the applicant one gun was recovered though it was licensed and the deceased also sustained injury from the gun fire.
6. ' I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.
7. ' From the tentative assessm ent of the record it appears that applicant/accused is prima facie fully connected with the commission of offence. It is to be decided by the Trial Court after recording of evidence as to whether Abdul Jabbar was killed by the applicant with his weapon or he attacked and applicant reacted in self-defence. There is recovery of gun from the possession of applicant at the time of his arrest. No case for further inquiry is made out. This criminal bail applications is dismissed.