RASHID AZIZ KHAN, J.- Fayyaz Ahmad, petitioner, seeks bail in a case registered against him and others with Police Station Alipur Chatha, District Gujranwala vide FIR dated 12.5.1992, for an offence under sections 302/148/149 PPC. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with his co- accused on 12.5.1992 at about 5 P.M. Came to the lands of the first informant and he along with his co-accused committed the murder of Fayyaz Ahmad, first informant's brother, and injuries to the witnesses.
2. It was contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that all the accused, except for the petitioner and Arif, have since been released on bail. Contends that according to the allegation the petitioner was armed with a gun, yet he did not i.e at the deceased, instead he used the Butt of his gun. Asserts that the petitioner is in custody since 24.5.1992 and the trial has not even commenced as yet. The contentions were opposed by learned counsel for the State.
3. I have heard the learned counsel and gone through the i.e. The role ascribed to the petitioner is that he gave a blow with the Butt of his gun to the deceased when he had fallen down. It was followed by the co-accused of the petitioner. Strangely enough, the other two co-accused of the petitioner, who were ascribed the same role, have been allowed bail. The rule of consistency demands that the petitioner should also be allowed the same concession. Even otherwise, I have noticed that the petitioner is neither required for purposes of investigation nor there is any allegation that the co-accused, who have been released on bail, have mis-used the concession of bail. In these circumstances, the petitioner is allowed bail, provided he furnishes security in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Gujranwala.