1. ' Brief facts of the prosecution case as stated in the F.I.R. Lodged by Rabdino alias Raboo Khaskheli at P.P. Daro of Police Station Mirpur Bathoro on 13.64994 at 10.45 p.m. Are that complainant and his brother deceased Rajab Ali are Haris of Javed Memon. Applicant/accused Rajab Parhiar owned lands which he has leased out to Israr Mangi. Complainant and his deceased brother also cultivated some portion of that land. The 'complainant and his relatives are residing on the land of Rajab Parhiar since 20 years. It is alleged that Rajab, Fida Hussain, Hussain and Manzoor Parhiars issued threats to the complainant party to migrate from their lands. On the night of incident at 10 p.m. It is alleged that the complainant, deceased Rajab Ali and their relatives Hussain, Jumoon and Bassar Khaskheli were standing in front of their houses when applicant/accused Rajab Hussain, co-accused Fida Hussain and Manzoor passed in front of them. Applicant Rajab, Hussain and Fida Hussain were allegedly armed with guns while Manzoor was armed with hatchet. Complainant party challenged the accused as to where they were going at that hour, whereupon co-accused Fida Hussain fired from his gun on Rajab Ali, brother of complainant. The said shot hit on the chest of Rajab Ali and he fell down. It is alleged that Rajab Parhiar and Hussain (applicants before this Court) also fired at complainant in order to kill him but he saved himself by falling on the ground.
2. The relatives of the complainant party who were allegedly with them challenged the accused, whereupon the accused ran away towards western side. Complainant party then found that Rajab had fire-arm injury on his chest and he was bleeding. Thereafter complainant and the witnesses took Rajab Ali in the vehicle of Abdul Rehman Memon to Daro Hospital but he died on the way. They took the dead body to Daro Hospital, whereafter leaving Hassan, Jumoon and Bassar in charge of the dead body the complainant came to P.P. Daro and lodged the F.I.R.
3. ' After usual investigation, the police sent up the applicants and co-accused Mansoor and Fida Hussain to face trial in the Sessions Court, Thatta.
4. ' Co-accused Manzoor was allowed bail and the bail plea of the present applicants was rejected by the learned trial Court, hence they have approached this Court.
5. ' I have heard Mr. A.Q. Halepota, learned counsel for the applicants. He has contended (i) that the applicants are assigned the role of ineffective firing and it is yet to be determined whether they had actually intention to kill the complainant and whether they actually fired as alleged. (ii) That the ocular evident is inconsistent as it is not supported by the circumstances of the prosecution case. (iii) That the ocular testimony is interested and partisan and it is falsified by the other circumstances of the case. (iv) That there is no recovery of weapon i,e, guns from the possession of the applicants/accused. (v) That admittedly single empty has been secured from the Vardat by the police, which fact alone is falsifying the prosecution story itself that these accused/applicants had fired at the complainant Rabdino alias Raboo. (vi) That even according to the prosecution case co-accused Fida Hussain is alleged to have fired at the deceased Rajab Ali and admittedly there is no any allegation against the present applicants that they had fired at deceased Rajab Ali.
6. ' My attention has been drawn to 1994 SCMR 1928, relevant page 1934, in which the Honourable Supreme Court has held as under:-- "(10) When we talk of corroboration, it is always required with regard to the version of the prosecution and with regard to the identity of each accused. Since no empty was recovered from the spot, therefore, the recoveries of fire-arms from the accused/respondents are of no consequence."
7. ' I have also heard Mr. S. Zahir Qureshi, Advocate appearing on behalf of A.-G. Sindh, for State who has opposed the prayer of bail of the applicants on the ground that they are facing trial under section 302 read with 34, P.P.C. And 307, P.P.C. I have perused the police papers and I have also gone through the authority of the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan. Admittedly these applicants had not fired at deceased Rajab Ali and the only allegation that they had fired at complainant Rabdino, is not supported by any circumstance of the prosecution case. Admittedly there is no any recovery of fire-arm from the possession of the accused/applicants. Moreover, there is no any recovery of empties more than one, which allegation according to the prosecution case is that co-accused Fida Hussain allegedly fired at the deceased which hit the deceased on his chest and he subsequently died on account of injuries.
8. ' Co-accused Manzoor is allowed bail by the trial Court on the ground that he was armed with hatchet and there are no hatchet injuries on the person of the deceased or any P.W. Here in this case also as there is no any recovery of fire-arm i,e, guns or any empty in support of the prosecution case and in view of the authority of the Honourable Supreme Court, referred tq above, prima facie the case of the accused/applicants is that of further enquiry and I order that the applicants be released on bail on their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 each with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.