1. The present two applicants and their 4 other companions are specifically named in F. I. R. And it is alleged that they caused injuries to Allahdino who died and three other eye-witnesses also received injuries in the attack made by the applicants and their companions. The incident took place on 16th April, 1977 at 3 p. m. And the report was lodged on the same day at 3-30 p. m. At Police Station Tando Jam in District Hyderabad. The relevant portion in F.I.R. Is to the effect that there was a quarrel over the grazing of goats in the agricultural fields, where after 6 accused persons specifically named in F. I. R. Came to the house of the complainant armed with hatchets and lathis and after abusing the accused persons opened an attack. Allahdino was given two or three hatchet injuries from sharp side by Isso on his head and applicant Ahmed caused hatchet injury from blunt side on the arm of complainant. Eye-witness Muharram was given hatchet injury from sharp side by Bashir Shidi and accused persons gave injuries to P. Ws. Babar and Photo with the blunt side of the hatchet and lathis. On the cries, Mst. Sultana appeared at the spot and she also received injuries. This is the version given in F.I.R. But subsequently when challan was presented in the Court the names of other accused persons including Bashir Shidi were dropped and only the present two applicants Ahmed and Isso were challaned. During the investigation lathi has been recovered from Ahmed which is stated to be stained with blood. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicants that as per F.I.R. The allegation was that Ahmed was armed with hatchet and he used blunt side of it in causing injuries to complainant. Medical evidence shows that injured Allahdino was removed to the hospital where he died on 21st April, 1977. He had sustained in all three injuries out of which two were seated on the head which were caused by blund weapon and one on the right arm which was cause by sharp cutting weapon. According to the initial medical report injury No. 2 caused by blunt weapon on the head was declared by the doctor to be grievous in nature. No recovery of weapon has been made from applicant Isso. There are four injured eye-witnesses who have sustained simple injuries. It is also contended by the learned counsel that both the applicants were found injured when they were arrested and such fact is mentioned in the mashirnama of their arrest. It is not clear from the record whether they were referred for medical examination. The contention of the learned counsel is that it is a case of sudden fight and since the prosecution story as stated by injured eyewitness who is complainant was not believed investigating agency and four accused persons were dropped and also that the version contained in the F. I. R. Is inconsistent with other evidence on the record, it is a fit case for grant of bail to both the applicants.
2. In view of the inconsistencies pointed out I admit both applicants to bail in the sum of Rs. 20,000 with one surety and P. R. Each in like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. This order is not intended to have any hearing on the merits of the case.