1. ' Complainant Wali Muhammad lodged F.I.R. As Crime No,6/95 at Police Station Mian-jo-Goth on 19-8-1995 disclosing that on the above date he along with his cousin Zulfikar Ali, Amanullah and Abdul Ghani were going to village Mirpur Buriro with their domestic work and at 9-30 a.m. When they arrived near Chana Bridge there they saw applicants Dodo, Sadiq armed with guns, accused Dhani Bux, Suhbat, Rahim Bux and Ali Gohar armed with Lathis. Accused Ali Gohar declared that they would commit the murder of Zulfikar Ali. He instigated the others whereupon applicants Dodo and Sadiq allegedly fired at Zulfikar Ali which hit on his right leg who fell down, the rest of the 'accused armed with Lathis caused Lathis blows which hit him on his head and other parts of the body. Applicants were arrested and they preferred bail application which was rejected on 10-10- 1995 by the learned Sessions Judge, Shikarpur.
2. ' It is contended by Mr. Yasin Khan Babar for the applicants that there is contradiction in ocular and medical evidence. According to the case of prosecution applicants are said to be armed with guns and fired at injured Zulfiqar Ali which hit him on his left leg. The rest of the accused are alleged to have caused Lathi blows on the head and other parts of injured Zulfiqar Ali. Applicant's counsel argued that medical certificate reveals that there are only two injuries on the body of the injured.
3. Injuries as per medical certificate are mentioned as under:--
(1) Crushed type of L.T.P. Wound muscle bone deep present near left knee-joint.
(2) An incised wound measuring 5 c.m. x 05 x scalp deep (bone was exposed) present near right partial region of head."
4. ' According to medical certificate injury No,1 is said to be the result of fire-arm and another injury an incised wound is with some sharp cutting weapon. Both the applicants are said to have fired one shot each, which according to F.I.R. Were received by injured at his left leg. Since there is noticed only one injury with fire-arm therefore, it is yet to be ascertained as to who out of these two applicants is responsible for this injury. Learned counsel contends that prosecution has not explained as how injured sustained injury No,2 because none of the persons nominated in the F.I.R.
5. Is said to have been armed with sharp cutting weapon. He further submits that the ocular evidence that some of the accused caused Lathi injuries to the injured is also belied by the medical evidence as there is not even a single injury with hard and blunt substance found over the body of the injured. Lastly it is argued that offence in this particular case falls under section 337-F(vi) Ghayr Jaifah which is punishable with seven years and does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Therefore, the case of prosecution requires further inquiry. In support he cited 1980 SCM R 784, 1986 PCr.LJ 924 and unreported authority of this Court in Criminal Bail Application No,858 of 1995.
6. ' Mr. Abdul Sattar Chohan for the State concedes to the arguments of applicant's counsel and submits that this is a case of further enquiry and has therefore, no objection to the grant of bail to the applicants.
7. The applicants according to F.I.R. Are said to be armed with guns and have fired one shot each at injured Zulfiqar Ali but medical certificate shows that there is only one injury with fire-arm. This contradiction leaves room for consideration as to who out of two is responsible for this particular injury, the benefit of which definitely goes to both the applicants. The presence of an incised wound and non-availability of injuries with hard and blunt substance further makes the case of prosecution to be of doubtful nature and it becomes of further enquiry as contemplated under section 497(2), Cr.P.C. The applicants are therefore, allowed concession of bail subject to their furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs,50,0Q0 each and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.