1. ' ALI MUHAMMAD BALOCH, J.--- The abovementioned three bail applications are being disposed of by this single order as the facts of these applications are similar and the grounds urged for the grant of bail are the same.
2. ' The relevant facts for the passing of this order are that the applicants Syed Muhammad Hashim Raza, Syed Shakir Hussain and Syed Kashif Hussain in company of the co-accused had committed the murders as well as had burnt the vehicles for which charge-sheets against them have been filed in the Court of Special Judge (S.T.A.) by the respective police stations. In all these cases the evidence against the applicants as well as co-accused is that applicants Syed Muhammad Hashim Raza, Syed Zakir Hussain and Syed Kashif Hussain after their arrest by the police had in a judicial confession recorded by a Magistrate confessed that they had committed the respective offences of which some cases were of murders and the others were of arson and attempt to commit murders. The accused (other than Syed Muhammad Hashim Raza, Syed Zakir Hussain and Syed Kashif Hussain) were named by these three applicants, who had confessed their guilt, to be with them at the time of commission of the alleged crimes. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants with respect to the applicants Syed Muhammad Hashim Raza, Syed Zakir Hussain and Syed Kashif Hussain is that the confessions recorded by the Magistrate are not reliable as the same were delayed by about two weaks after the arrest of the applicants and that there are other flows in the said confessions which, according to the learned counsel, cannot be made basis for the convictions of the makers thereof, if not supported by any other evidence. The learned counsel for the applicant., respect of the recoveries from the possessions of the abovenamed three applicants, who had confessed their guilt before the Magistrate, stated that such recoveries may also not be relied upon on account of the ground that a recovery Mashirs were not reliable and that the provisions of section 103, Cr.P.C. Were not strictly complied at the time of preparing the Mashirnamas of recoveries. The learned counsel, appearing for the State, has however, _try strongly opposed the grant of bail to the applicants stating that the applicants are charged with committing massacre of innocent people at different places as they belong to a particular religious group which was against some other religious groups. The further contention of the learned counsel for the State is that the Stengun, Klashnikovs, Light machine-gun, Pistols and other ammunition was recovered by the police on the pointation of some of the applicants. Further contention of the learned State Counsel is that the confessional statement cannot be subjected to deeper scrutiny at this stage and even if the Court comes to conclusions that it requires supporting evidence, the same is available in shape of the recoveries of arms and ammunition described above.
3. ' In Criminal Bail No,1523 of 1996 the applicants Syed Muhammad Hashim Raza, Syed Zakir Hussain and Syed Kashif Hussain are the only applicants, who have made judicial confessions and also led the police to the recoveries, of the arms used by them at times of occurrence.
4. ' In Criminal Bail No,1524 of 1996 apart from the abovenamed three applicants, who have confessed their guilt, the applicant Mir Afsar has been shown to be implicated on account of his name being taken by the three other applicants in their judicial confessions. In Criminal Bail No,1525 of 1996, similarly applicants Ahmed Hussain and Mir Afsar are implicated due to their names having been taken by the three co-accused ho made judicial confessions.
5. ' Learned counsel for the applicants also relied upon an order passed by this Court in Criminal Bail No,966 of 1996 in which bail was allowed to the app'icants whose names were taken by the applicants Syed Muhammad Hashim Raza, Syed Zakir Hussain and Syed Kashif Hussain in their judicial confessions.
6. We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel and we are of the view that die judicial confessions by the applicants Syed Muhammad Hashim Raza, Syed Zakir Hussain and Syed Kashif Hussain cannot be scrutinized deeply at this stage so that the trial Court may stand prejudiced by our observations on them. Apart from that this is not the only piece of evidence against the three applicants, who made their confessions but they have also led the police and pointed out the arms and ammunitions, which ordinarily could hardly be foisted by the police, for the sake of involving them in the cases. Therefore, we are clear in our mind that these three applicants Syed Muhammad Hashim Raza, Syed Zakir Hussain and Syed Kashif Hussain are not entitled to be released on bail at this stage.
7. ' However, we find that the, case of applicant Muhammad Afsar (in Criminal Bail Application No,1524 of 1996) and Criminal Bail Application No,1525 of 1996). And the case of applicant Ahmed Hussain (in Criminal Bail Application No,1525 of 1996) stand on a different footing, as the only piece of evidence against them is their implication by the confessing accused in their judicial confessions. Since on similar evidence we have already granted bail to the co-accused in Criminal Bail Application No,967 of 1996, we consider that the case of these two accused Muhammad Afsar and Ahmad Hussain is similar to the case of applicants in Criminal Bail Application No,967 of 1996.
8. Their case attracts the principle of consistency, therefore, we find them entitled to be released on bail.
9. As a result, the applicants Syed Muhammad Hashim Raza, Syed Zakir Hussain and Syed Kashif Hussain are not found entitled to be released on bail in all the three bail applications, therefore, their bail plea is rejected in all the three applications, while the applicants Mir Afsar and Ahmed Hussain are found entitled to be released on bail in the two bail applications viz. Criminal Bail Applications Nos.1524 of 1996 and 1525 of 1996 in which they have applied for bail. Consequently, we order that applicants Mir Afsar and Ahmed Hussain be released on bail on their furnishing one surety in each case in the sum of Rs,100,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand) with P.R. Bond in the equal sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.