1. ' Present applicants are facing trial under sections 324, 353, 148, 428, 149, P.P.C. Read with section 17(2)(3) of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979 bearing Crime No,10 of 2001 registered with Police Station Rustam. The present applicants moved bail application before the trial Court but without success. Hence this application.
2. ' It is the case of prosecution that the applicants abovenamed duly armed with hatchets and Lathis deterred the police officials from performing their official duty and launched the murderous assault upon police party and five accused during encounter are said to have been arrested namely and respectively Razi Jaro, Dinoo, Pathan and Pehalwan and from them the weapons have been recovered and they have been booked separately under section 13-D of the Arms Ordinance.
3. ' Learned counsel for applicants Mr. Sarfraz Khan Jatoi has contended that it is case of ineffective firing although it is a claim of the prosecution that seven hours firing continued between the applicants and police party and yet no one has sustained injury and in support of his contentions he has placed reliance on a case of Rab Nawaz v. The State 1990 SCMR 1985 wherein the Honourable Supreme Court has granted bail to the accused who had encounter with police party and none of them had sustained injuries. He has further contended that hatchets and Lathis were also being carried by the accused persons and according to him during the encounter the women of the locality arrived at the place of Wardat and they implored the police party in the name of the Holy Qur'an not to arrest the accused as they are innocent and finally has prayed for grant of bail.
4. On the other hand Mr. Abdul Fatah Mughul learned counsel for State has opposed to the grant of bail and has contended that they are criminal and they launched murderous assault upon with police and out of them five accused have been booked under section 13-D of Arms Ordinance.
5. ' We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties at the bar and have examined the material available on record. Admittedly it is the case of ineffective firing.
6. The impugned order reveals that the accused also caused blows to S.H.O., Police Station Jaggan and when asked as to whether the said S.H.O of Police Station sustained injuries or was sent to Medical Officer for treatment, the learned State Counsel submitted that there is no such certificate with regard to the injuries of S.H.O. Police Station Jaggan even he stated that he was not sent to the Medical Officer for treatment. As far as the recovery of the weapons from Razi, Jam, Dinoo Pathan and Pehalwan is concerned they have been separately booked under section 13-D Arms Ordinance and they have got separate remedy for bail application. At the moment we are with the instant case which is the of ineffective firing. It is starting to note that seven hours firing continued and yet no one sustained injuries and version of the prosecution at the moment is viewed with suspicion and we are of the considered view that the case of the applicants is a case of ineffective firing and their intention of killing the police personnel is yet to be seen at the time of trial and the case of the applicants is falling within the purview of section 497 (2), C r. P. C . Accordingly, the applicants are granted bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,50,000 each and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.