' The facts leading to the filing of this petition for grant of bail are that a case under section 148/149/302, P.P.C. Was registered against the petitioners and eight others with Police Station Saddar, Gujrat, on 6-11-1987. The case was got registered by one Muhammad Aslam with the allegation that on 6-11-1987 while the first informant alongwith Ghulam Hussain and Muhammad Arif was coming to his village, a slight altercation took place between Muhammad Arif and Ghulam Hussain, but the first informant got the matter patched up there and then. They came to their village; when the first informant with the P.Ws. Was sitting on the roof of the house of one Muhammad Afzal, his cousin, the petitioners alongwith their eight co-accused came on the roof of the house of Muhammad Arshad. One Muhammad Riaz, co-accused of the petitioner, fired .7 mm rifle hitting Muhammad Ansar, son of the first informant, who died at the spot. Thereafter, all the accused resorted to indiscriminate firing though nobody was injured.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the role ascribed to the petitioners is that they were armed with .12 bore guns and resorted to indiscriminate firing after the main occurrence. Submits that six co-accused of the petitioners have already been released on bail and the rule of the consistency demands that they may also be given the concession of bail. Contends that neither any empty from the spot was recovered nor .12 bore guns have been recovered at the instance of the petitioners. The contentions have been controverted by the learned Additional Advocate-General.
3. I have heard the learned counsel at length and perused the record. The allegation against the petitioners is that they were present at the scene of occurrence with their co-accused armed with .12 bore guns. They are not alleged to have fired at the deceased. The allegation against them is that they resorted to indiscriminate firing after Muhammad Ansar had been done to death. It is also prosecution's own version that the indiscriminate firing did not result in injuries to any of the P.Ws. No recoveries of .12 bore empties were effected from the spot. Both the petitioners are alleged to have been armed with .12 bore guns, yet the same were not recovered. Six of the co-accused of the petitioners have already been released on bail and the role of the petitioners is identical with that of the co-accused who have been released on bail. There is nothing on the file which could lend corroboration towards the involvement of the petitioners in the commission of the offence apart from the F.I.R. In such circumstances, I feel that it is a case of further inquiry which entitles the petitioners to the concession of bail. Therefore, both the petitioners are allowed bail provided they furnish security in the sum of Rs,50,000 each, with two sureties each, in the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Gujrat.