' MUHAMMAD IQBAL MAHAR, J.---Through instant bail application, applicant/accused seeks bail in Crime No,25/2009 registered at Police Station Setharja District Khairpur for offences punishable under Sections 302, 324, 337H(2), 147, 148, 149, 504, P.P.C. Earlier his bail application has been dismissed by the learned trial Court
2. The brief facts of prosecution case are that on 18.02.2009 complainant party were present in their lands in connection with the rotation of water. At about 9:30 a.m. Accused Ghulam Qasim alias Mehboob, armed with Kalashnikov, Ayaz armed with repeater, Fayaz and Arshad armed with hatchets, Yasin having lathi and 04 unknown persons armed with TT pistol, hatchet and lathi respectively appeared there. On coming, the accused persons diverted the flow of water to their land whereupon the complainant party restrained them on which accused Ghulam Qasim challenged the complainant party that today they will not be spared. Saying so accused Ghulam Qasim fired at Mumtaz Ali which hit him and he fell down, accused Ayaz and one unknown accused fired at Ghulam Muhammad whereas accused Fayaz, Arshad and two unidentified persons caused hatchet and lathi blows to complainant which hit him, the injured persons raised cries and fell down. On cries Faiz Mohammad, Mohammad Sharif and other co-villagers went running there but the accused persons seeing them fled away while making aerial firing. The complainant party went over Mumtaz Ali and Ghulam Mohammad and found them sustaining injuries, they took Mumtaz Ali and Ghulam Mohammad to Police Station, got letter for treatment and went to Setharja Hospital but during treatment Mumtaz Ali succumbed to the injuries in the Hospital, thereafter complainant lodged instant FIR.
3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that role of firing at deceased Mumtaz Ali and injured Ghulam Muhammad is attributed to co-accused Ghulam Qasim and Ayaz while role of causing hatchet injuries to complainant is attributed to co-accused Fayaz whereas the allegation against applicant is that he along with unknown accused caused hatchet blow to Ghulam Mohammad. He further submitted that the case against the applicant is on better footing to that of co-accused Ayaz and Fayaz who have been acquitted by the learned trial Court vide judgment dated 02.03.2011, therefore, he prayed for grant of bail.
4. Complainant Gul Bahar present in person stated that he has no objection if the applicant accused is granted bail by this Court however the learned APG opposed the bail application on the ground that applicant is nominated in the FIR and specific role of causing hatchet injury to PW Ghulam Mohammad is attributed to him and he was absconder.
5. Heard learned Counsel for applicant, complainant, learned APG and perused the material available on record. The learned counsel for the applicant has filed certified true copies of depositions of complainant and PWs which are available at pages 39 to 46 and copy of judgment at page 51 whereby co-accused Fayaz and Ayaz have been acquitted. Since the complainant and two infured PWs have not implicated the applicant/accused in their evidence and two co-accused on similar allegations have been acquitted by learned trial Court, the applicant also becomes entitled to grant of bail. So far the contention of learned APG that applicant was an absconder is concerned, it is settled law that bail could be granted, if accused had good case on merits and mere his absconsion would not come in the way while granting him bail. In this. Respect reliance is placed on a famous case of Mitho Pitafi v. The State reported in 2009 SCM R 299.
6. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, case-law and no objection of the complainant, instant bail application is allowed. The applicant/ accused is granted bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,300,000 (Three lacs) and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
' Bail application stands disposed of.