' HASAN FEROZ, J.---By this bail application applicant Muhammad Naveed has challenged the order dated 28-9-2013 passed by learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Criminal Bail Application No.1156 of 2013 whereby bail after arrest has been refused to him in Crime No.22 of 2013 registered at Police Station Hali Road, Hyderabad for the offence under section 302, P.P.C.
2. Facts of the case are that deceased Rehan Saghir was having medical store shop in his name at Quba Masjid and on 8-3-2013 due to non-reaching of Rehan Saghir in his house, complainant along with his brother Nauman had gone to medical store to see the deceased where they saw neighbourer of colony namely Muhammad Naveed alias Baghri,
2. Kaloo Gaddi,
3. Shoaib alias Sheba along with Mustafa Machi armed with pistol were fighting with their brother. Deceased Rehan Saghir caught hold of Mustafa Machi, who on seeing the brothers of deceased coming towards them in order to rescue himself straight fired at deceased Rehan Saghir, which hit him at his right side buttock joint, who became injured and fell down on the road and Mustafa Machi while throwing pistol along with his three companions ran away on motorcycle parked nearby.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the present applicant/accused has no role of causing injury to deceased Rehan Saghir and there appears ground for further inquiry.
Learned counsel relying on 2010 SCM R 1178 and 2011 SCM R 902 further contended that neither the intention of applicant/accused nor participation comes out at this stage and the case falls under further inquiry.
4. Learned Assistant P.G. Has opposed this bail application and contended that the applicant/accused shared common intention in causing death of the deceased.
5. I have in my consideration that the applicant/accused is shown to be present with no role in the murder of deceased. Since the deceased has been murdered with single fire shot by co-accused Mustafa Machi, who was caught hold by the deceased Rehan Saghir and in order to get himself released fired at the deceased which hit him on his right buttock joint and ultimately he succumbed to his injuries in the hospital. The applicant/accused was arrested on 15-3-2013 and since then he is behind the bars.
6. The citation relied upon by the learned counsel is attracted to the facts and circumstances of the present case and there being reasonable grounds emerging at this tentative stage that the applicant/accused has not shared the commission of offence of murder however, his presence on the spot was very much seen by witnesses. Under the above circumstances bail could not refused on the basis of vicarious liability unless the accused was shown through positive evidence to have played a role in the murder of deceased.
7. It is well settled that at the bail stage issue of common intention is normally one of further enquiry unless there are other compelling reasons circumstances to reach a different conclusion i.e. By way of other pieces of evidence, which could definitely connect the applicant/accused with the crime enquiry. Reliance is placed on 2010 SCM R 1178.
There being grounds for further enquiry under section 497(2), Cr.P.C. At this stage bail application is allowed. Applicant/accused is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.200,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.
9. The observation being of tentative nature would not affect the course of trial and if any tangible evidence implicating the present accused during trial occurs the observation would not come in its way.