1. R ' The applicants are facing trial before the Special Judge, S.T.A., Shikarpur in Crime No,10/95 of Police Station Tangwani, District Jacobabad registered on 24-1-1995. In the F.I.R. Lodged by complainant Shah Nawaz the allegation is that on the night of 24-1-1995 he and his family woke up at about 3-00 a.m. In the night on the barking of dogs and in the electric light saw the applicants and other accused named in the F.I.R. Out of the several accused Rano is said to have given Lalkara to the complainant and then to have fired directly a burst from Kalashnikov which he was carrying.
2. It is alleged that the burst hit father of the complainant in his left knee and he fell down. Hearing the firing villagers came over and the accused slipped away.
3. ' The applicants' counsel states that the applicants have been falsely involved due to enmity otherwise no such incident took place. He has also submitted that in so far as applicant Mazar is concerned he is too old and infirm to have been involved in the kind of incident alleged. Further contention is that according to the F.I.R. Itself no overt act has been alleged against any of the two applicants. The only shot said to have been fired is attributed to co-accused Rano.
4. ' Mr. Abdul Ghafoor Pirzada however, opposes the bail application on the .Ground that the applicants are named in the F.I.R. And that they were members of the unlawful assembly, as such they were vicariously liable for the crime.
5. ' Applicant's bail application moved before the trial Court having been rejected the applicants have moved this Court.
6. We find from the F.I.R. That no overt act has been attributed to the applicants and it is correct that the allegation of causing injury to complainant's father is attributed only to co-accused Rano. As such the nature and extent of applicants' involvement in the crime is yet to be determined on evidence. That apart we also find inconsistency in the F.I.R. And the medical report. In the F.I.R. Injury is said to have been inflicted on the knee of the injured while in the medical report it is shown to have been on the thigh. In the circumstances we consider that applicants' case is that of further inquiry.
7. ' We may mention that in the case of applicant Mazar an additional ground for grant of bail is his infirmity. We had called applicant Mazar and found him to be quite old. He had tremor in his hands and was unable to stand straight. He also wore thick glasses. We accordingly grant bail to both the applicants on their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,50,000 each and P.R. Bond in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.