1. This order will dispose of bail application submitted on behalf of accused Muhammad Imran Khan and Rashid Hameed Siddiqui who are involved in F.I.R. No.69 of 1995 which was registered on 15-8- 1995 for the offence under section 17(2) of the Qisas and Diyat Ordinance. The English version of F.I.R. Reads as under:--- "A written statement under section 154, Cr.P.C. Through S.H.O. By hand from P.C. Muhammad Yousuf was received wherein it is stated that I, Dr. Ashraf Gillani son of Muhammad Yahya residing at A- 457, Block-7, Karachi Administration Society, Karachi and as a Doctor I run a clinic at Manzoor Colony. Today 14-8-1995 at 23-00 hours the bell of my house rang. When I opened the door four boys entered two of them were carrying T.T. Pistols and on the force of arms attacked me to hand over keys of the safe. I refused and resisted and made noise and hue and cry. On hearing my noise police mobile of Balouch Colony reached at the spot and accused persons whose names were disclosed latter on to me as Rashid Siddiqui, Imcan and Saif were arrested and from each of the accused qmran and Rashid one pistol of .30 and .32 bore loaded with live 5 and 7 cartridges were recovered. Co-accused Zia alias Shanna whose name was disclosed later on to me ran away under the cover of darkness and disappeared. My complaint is against all the four accused for entering into my flat with the intention to commit dacoity (Harabah). Action may be taken."
2. Their bail application was rejected by the learned trial Court on 14-9-1995. I have heard Mr. Gul Zaman Khan alongwith Syed Ghazanfar A.I Shah learned counsel for the applicant/accused and Mr. Suleman. Habibullah learned counsel for the State. The latter has opposed the bail application. I have also perused the record. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there is delay of six hours in lodging the F.I.R. Which creates suspicion regarding the alleged incident. Furthermore no identification parade was held and the alleged offence is not punishable with imprisonment for life and also it does not fall within the prohibitory clause. After giving due consideration to the respective submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the accused and State and examination of record I have come to the conclusion on the basis of tentative assessment of the evidence available with the prosecution that the matter requires further enquiry whether the provision of section 17(2) of the Qisas and Diyat Ordinance are attracted or not. Therefore even at bail stage the accused are entitled to the benefit of doubt. Accordingly they are admitted to bail in the sum of rupees one lac (1,00,000) each with P.R. Bond in the like amount with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.