' Bail has been sought by Hafeezullah and Mohammad Hassan in a case arising out of Crime No, 92 of 1999 of Police Station Karampur for an offence punishable under sections 302, 337-H(2), 147, 148, 149 P.P.C. As per allegations in the F.I.R. There was an incident of Karo-Kari in which a faisla was held and amount of Rs,8000 was yet to be paid by Shabir Ahmed on the first of the month but he had failed to pay.
' According to F.I.R. Accused Hafizullah,
2. Mohammad Hassan,
3. Shaikh Mohammad,
4. Subooh Sadique,
5. Dilawer,
6. Chakar and 7. Nawabuddin, all armed with guns entered the house of complainant Suleman and out of them Hafizullah fired his gun at Shabir Ahmed which hit him and he fell down second fire was made by Mohammad Hassan which too hit Shabbir, who died on the spot. It is stated in the F.I.R. That the culprits had declared that they will kill Shabir Ahmed as he has not been able to pay balance amount of Rs, 8000. F.I.R. Of the occurrence was lodged on 3-12-1999 at 7-10 p.m. During the investigation the police took the view that the complainant himself was involved in the murder of his brother and they found all the accused persons innocent. Second investigation was conducted by CIA who found the accused persons innocent excepting the applicants. The complainant, being dissatisfied with the progress made during the investigation filed a direct complaint which was brought on record and bailable warrants for arrest of the accused/applicants were ordered. Later on, Investigation was conducted by Crime Branch and under the orders of I.G. Police, the case was challaned, again disbelieving half of the story.
' Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there are conflicting reports of Investigating Officers each time disbelieving the story as set up by complainant and cognizance has been taken by the Court of the same offence upon direct complaint wherein bailable warrants of the arrest have been issued against the applicants which shows that their case is of bail. He relied upon the case of Muhammad Rafiq v. Abdur Rahman 1986 SCM R 1978 and argued that the opinion of investigation cannot be ignored altogether. He was frank enough to concede that the latest view of the honorable Supreme Court is that opinion of Investigating Officer shall not be taken as the sole factor for the purpose of grant of bail.
' Learned Asstt: A.G conceded to grant for bail on the ground that the trial Court by issuing bailable warrants has virtually granted bail to the accused persons in the offence.
There are conflicting reports of Investigating Officers about the role of present applicant and the story as ,regards the remaining accused has consistently been disbelieved, while the trial Court has brought the case on record upon a direct complaint and has issued bailable warrants which in turn amounts to grant of bail to accused persons in the same offence. I am of the humble view that the opinion of trial Court cannot be overlooked. Obviously, the story as set up, in the F.I.R. Could not be established during investigation as regards the role and numbers of assailants. The case in the direct complaint will take the lead. Therefore, as regards bail, the order of trial Court shall have priority and precedence.
' On the whole, the circumstances tend to make out a case of bail, I would accordingly accept the bail plea and allow the application. The applicants be released on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs, 3,00,000 each and executing P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.