' The petitioners and three others are named in a case registered vide F.I.R. No,58/95, dated 20-2- 1995 under section 302/324/337-A(ii)/148/149, P.P.C. Police Station Gagoo, Diitrict Vehari on the complaint of one Nikka.
2. The prosecution story as given in the F.I.R. Is that in consequence of some dispute among the womenfolk, Abdul Rashid armed with rod Muhammad Nazir (petitioner) armed with Dang, Akbar (petitioner) armed with Sota, Muhammad Irshad armed with Sota and Muhammad Sadiq armed with pistol came to the spot. Petitioners raised a Lalkara that complainant should be fired at. Sadiq fired but the complainant remained unhurt. Abdul Rashid gave a blow with the iron rod which landed on the head of Allah Ditta which ultimately proved to be fatal and he died. The role attributed to petitioner Nazir is that he gave a Dang blow on the head of Nikka complainant and Akbar petitioner also gave a Dang blow which landed on the left forearm.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks their bail on the ground that the petitioners are not attributed any injury to the deceased; that only simple injuries one each is ascribed to them; that they are behind the bars for the last more than one year and that not a single prosecution witness has been examined so far. He relied on Noor Ahmad v. The State 1992 PCr.LJ 1841 and Muhammad Amin v. The State 1986 PCr.LJ 782(2) to contend that in the similar circumstances this Court had allowed bail.
4. Learned State Counsel, on ".1-A.: other hand, has opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that both the petitioners are vicariously liable for the murder and that they came armed to the spot and, therefore, shared the common intention.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record.
6. No injury to the deceased is attributed to the petitioners. Muhammad Nazir petitioner allegedly gave a Dang blow to the complainant and he received a simple injury and even Akbar is attributed a single blow which too proved to be simple. The motive part of the prosecution story is relatable to a petty dispute between womenfolk. The petitioners are behind the bars since 20-2-1995 and the trial is not in sight in the near future.
' In the circumstances I am inclined to admit the petitioners to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.