1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL SOOMRO, J.---By this common order, we propose to dispose of Criminal Bail Application Nos.859, 902 of 2001 and 339 of 2002, filed on behalf of applicants Najamuddin, Taj Muhammad, Nabi Bux, Muhammad Saleh, Miandad, Moula Bux, Dhani Bux and Muhammad Hashim in a case bearing Crime F.I.R. No,54 of 2001 of Police Station, Mahi Makool for offences under sections 302, 324, 337-11(ii), 452, 148 and 149, P.P.C. The hail plea of the applicants was declined by the learned IInd: Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (STA), Larkana vide orders dated 3-11- 2001 and 25-1-2001 repsectively.
2. ' The prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R. Is that on the eventful day i,e, 15-5-2001 complainant Abdul Ghani Chandio appeared at Police Station Mahi Makool and lodged an F.I.R. Alleging inter alia that about 4/5 years prior to the incident his brother Nizamuddin entered into marriage with Mst. Zarina daughter of Muharram Chano on which Miandad Chano and his relatives were unhappy and threatened to take revenge of that. It is further alleged that, thereafter, Miandad and his relatives had shifted to village Jhinjh, Baluchistan and settled in Usta Muhammad. It is also disclosed in the F.I.R. That about two years prior to the incident Miandad Chano and his associates attacked on their village with the deadly weapons and such case was registered against them, but due to intervention of the nekmard matter was subsided. The F.I.R. Further discloses that on the eventful night complainant alongwith his brothers Nizamuddin, Noor Ahmed, his cousin Asghar Ali and his sister-in-law Mst. Zarina alongwith other family members after taking dinner went into bed.
3. It is also disclosed that the electric light was available. At 12-15 a.m. Night there was a nock at the door on which they woke up and saw 1. Miandad being armed with K.K. 2 Moula Bux alias Khasho with rifle 3. Deedar 4. Dhani Bux 5. Muhammad Hashim 6. Asghar 7. Hadi Bux 8. Barkat Ali alias Baggo 9. Miral 10. Saleh 11. Abdul Rasool 12. Khuda Bux 13. Dooso 14. Haji Khan 15. Najamuddin 16. Taj Muhammad 17. Nabi Bux and 18 Ayoo alias Ayoob armed with guns and were standing in the courtyard of the house. It is alleged that Miandad challenged that Nizamuddin be not spared. At this accused Miandad being armed with K.K. Moula Bux alias Khasho with rifle and the accused who were armed with guns directly fired at Nizamuddin with an intention to kill, as a consequence whereof complainant Abdul Ghani, his brother Noor Ahmed and cousin Asghar fell on the ground with the result the fire shot hit his brother Nizamuddin; Mst. Ghazala, sister-in-law Mst. Zarina and nephew Ghulam Murtaza and they fell down on the ground by raising cries. The complainant party raised commotion and on commotion and fire-arm reports, villagers and the people from the vicinity came running alongwith their respective weapons and fired in the air. On verification Nizamuddin was found to have sustained injuries, he was bleeding and was dead. Mst. Ghazala also sustained fire-arm injuries and she was dead and Mst. Zarina, Ghulam Murtaza both of them after having sustained injuries went unconscious. The complainant party leaving the P. Ws. For taking care of the two deceased removed injured to hospital for first aid and complainant approached the concerned police station for registration of F.I.R., which- was lodged as above. The investigation followed and in due course the applicants were sent up to stand trial in the Court of law.
4. ' We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the case against their client is false and they have been implicated in the background of enmity and suspicion. It has further been contended that deceased Nizamuddin sustained two injuries, one on the right scapula region being an exit wound and another fire-arm wound on right side of waist with an exist wound whereas Mst. Ghazala sustained only one injury at her abdomen. As far injured Mst. Zarina is concerned, she sustained four injuries as a result of two shots and injured Murtaza sustained two injuries being entry and exit, as a result of fire-arm. It has further been contended that all injuries sustained by two deceased and injured persons were as a result of six shots. The counsel argued that it is a case of general allegations and no specific part has been assigned to any individual accused. It has further been explored by the learned counsel that it is a case of two versions inasmuch as according to the F.I.R. So far 18 persons were disclosed to have attacked on a complainant party whereas the statements recorded under section 161 and 164, Cr.P.C. Show that the number of accused has been inflated to 21. More so, therefore, also variations in the version of the prosecution story with regard to the version given in F.I.R., statements recorded under sections 161 and 164, Cr.P.C. Respectively. Learned counsel in that eventuality argues that this is a fit case where the applicants could be enlarged on bail. They have referred to the case of Jaffar v. The State (1980 SCM R 784), Shahbaz Gul v. The States (1984 PCr.LJ 2495), Muhammad Amin v. The State (1987 PCr.LJ 1404) and Gulzar Ahmed v. The State (1992 PCr.LJ 1616).
5. ' Messrs Ali Azhar Tunio, learned A.A.-G. Appearing on behalf of the State with the assistance of Ghulamullah Mahoto counsel for complainant has opposed the grant of bail on various angles inasmuch as according to the F.I.R., the incident had taken place on 15-5-2001 at quarter to 12 mid- night whereas the F.I.R. Was registered at 1-00 p.m. i,e, after 45 minutes of the incident and the distance between the police station is hardly 4/5 K.Ms. It has also been contended by them that the oral version of the complainant and the P.Ws. Is corroborated by the medical evidence. It has also been argued that though the incident has taken place during night yet the identification was shown on the light of electric bulbs, which excludes the possibility of mistaken identity of the culprits. It has also been contended by them that the specific part of causing fire-arm injuries to the deceased and injured is consistent with medical evidence. The arguments were further explored by saying that the police has recovered unlicensed crime weapons such as SBBL guns alongwith live cartridges on the pointation of applicants Muhammad Saleh and Nabi Bux. On 25-5- 2001 and 26-5-2001 the Police has recovered the unlicensed crime weapons such as gun alongwith live cartridges at the pointation of accused Najamuddin and Taj Muhammad. Learned counsel has referred to the case of Dhani Bux v. State (1989 SCM R 239) in support of their contention.
6. ' Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record we are of the considered opinion that the arguments raised by the complainant party appears to be more weighty in comparison to the arguments raised by the applicant counsel and as such they have not been able to make out a case for bail, which accordingly is dismissed.
7. ' Criminal Bail Applications Nos.859, 902 of 2001 and 339 of 2002 stand disposed of.