1. ' SALMAN HAMID, J.---Soomar, son of Allah Warayo, (applicant) is booked along with 13 other accused in F.I.R. No,169 of 2011 of Police Station Khuda Abad, District Dadu for offence punishable under sections 302, 324, 365, 458, 141, 148, 149, 504 Pakistan Penal Code.
2. ' Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the case requires further inquiry and also stated that it is not clear from the contents of the F.I.R. That whether actually the injury had been caused to Sain Dad by the applicant; that on the date and time of incident there was hue and cry but still it is strange that the complainant remembered the detailed particulars of the persons barged into his house which particulars include their name, age, parentage and the weapon each one of them was carrying.
3. ' On the other hand learned A.P.-G. Appearing for the State vehemently opposed the application and stated that specific role has been assigned to the applicant and that because of above firing, as mentioned in the F.I.R., two fatalities of Sawan and Ashraf Khan occurred and also three injuries had been sustained by Mumtaz, Sain Dad and Rasheed, one of which is associated with the applicant. It was also mentioned that on 10-4-2011 such persons also abducted one Farzana from the complainant's house for whose recovery Constitutional Petition is pending before this court.
4. ' I have heard the learned counsel for either side and have perused the material available on record. The only allegation against the applicant in the F.I.R. Is that he fired from Kalashnikov straight upon one Sain Dad, father-in-law of Ghulam Mustafa Panhwar, the complainant. The narration of the F.I.R. Would show that on 10-4-2011 Sirka 1850 hours some 23 persons, 13 of whom identified in the F.I.R. And rest remained unidentified, barged into the house of the complainant when they were duly armed; made fire shots with the result two fatalities occurred on the complainant side together with three injuries one of which is associated with the present applicant.
5. The narration of the F.I.R. By itself shows that for some strange reasons the complainant could, out of 23 persons who allegedly barged into his house, remembered the names of 13 persons their ages and also their parentage despite the fact that it was a night time. The complainant could also remember the kind of weapons each one of them was carrying. This description of the persons with their arms in itself shows that it is not clear as to how the complainant could remember the names of 13 persons with other particulars and requires further inquiry. It also, under these circumstances, create doubt as to whether and indeed the fire shot, by which Sain Dad received injury, had been caused from the weapon of the applicant and/or that indeed he was carrying such weapon and fired from it which account requires further inquiry. Though it may be true that at bail stage deeper appreciation of evidence is not permissible, yet at the same time it may also be observed that in the manner the narration of the events disclosed in the F.I.R. Require further probe. Looking at the facts and circumstances, as mentioned in F.I.R., the applicant is enlarged on bail subject to his providing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,100,00 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.