1. ' The applicant Nisar Ahmed is facing trial in the Court of Sessions Judge, Dadu in Sessions Case No,115 of 2001 in Crime No,85 of 2001, in an offence punishable under sections 302, 324, 147, 148, 149, 504, 114, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Dadu. The applicant has preferred this application for seeking bail in the above crime as he has been arrested in this case. As the applicant has falsely been implicated in this case at the hands of complainant on account of old enmity. The bail plea on behalf of the applicant/accused was filed in the trial Court, which was dismissed on 22-8-2002 by the learned Sessions Judge, Dadu, hence this application.
2. ' The brief facts, as narrated in the F.I.R. Lodged by the complainant Ahsan 'Chandio on 9-6-2001.
3. Are that on 25-1-2001 the tractor of Nisar Ahmed was burnt and on 8-5-2001 Nisar Ahmed lodged F.I.R. At Police Station Rukkan against complainant Ahsan Chandio, Shahnawaz and others. The above case was sent up in the Court and, thereafter, complainant Ahsan Chandio, Shahnawaz were released on bail. It is further stated in the F.I.R. That on the day of incident, the complainant alongwith Shahnawaz, Mir Ahmed and Shah Pasand had come to the Sessions Court and were standing in the Waranda of IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Dadu where they saw applicant Nisar Ahmed. Sikandar, Ghulam Nabi, Mazan and Hassan Shah standing outside the Waranda. As per F.I.R., Nisar Ahmed, Sikandar and Ghulam Nabi were armed with pistols at that time there was call from the Court and when they reached near door of the Court, accused Hassan Shah and Mazan instigated their companions to kill Shahnawaz and Ahsan Chandio, whereupon accused Nisar Ahmed fired from his pistol at Shahnawaz, which hit him on his chest, who fell down in the Courtroom. Co-accused Sikandar fired from his pistol at complainant Ahsan Chandio which hit him who also fell down while raising cries. Accused Ghulam Nabi fired 2/3 shots in the air in the said Court. Police reach there and apprehended accused Nisar Ahmed alongwith pistol whereas remaining accused persons ran away due to the arrival of people. Complainant went towards Shahnawaz and saw him lying dead in the Courtroom and blood was oozing from his injuries. The police then took dead body to Civil Hospital and complainant went to Police Station Dadu where his F.I.R. Was lodged.
4. ' Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant has been involved falsely due to enmity and crime weapon viz. Pistol and four bullets were foisted at the instance of complainant and the co-accused Sikandar, who fired from his pistol at complainant. Ahsan Chandio has been let off by the police alongwith other co-accused. It is further pointed out by the learned counsel for the applicant that the complainant had filed an application under section 190(3), 193 and 173, Cr.P.C. With prayer to issue. Non-Bailable Warrants against the let off accused and to join them in the trial but the same application was dismissed by an order dated 22-8-2002 by the learned Sessions judge with observations that there is no reasonable cause to bring out the accused from Column No,2 and place them in column of main accused unless some tangible evidence is brought on record. It is further urged that the applicant/accused was arrested on 9-6-2001 and since about 20 months no charge has been framed, it amounts to shocking delay and there is no probability to conclude the trial in near future. It is further urged that the crime weapon and the bullets were dispatched after seven (7) months and no reliance can be made on the report of Ballistic Expert.
5. ' Conversely, Mr. Fazlur Rahman Awan, Advocate appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the application on the ground that specific role of firing pistol shot at deceased Shahnawaz has been assigned to the applicant/accused as a result of which he lost his life and the applicant/accused was arrested at the spot and crime weapon and four live bullets were recovered.
6. ' I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and examined the material placed on record. According to the F.I.R., there are three eye-witnesses of the occurrence and it is stated in the F.I.R. As well as in the 161, Cr.P.C. Statement that the applicant Nisar Ahmed fired from his pistol at Shahnawaz, which hit him on his chest. According to the post-mortem report, the deceased sustained fire-arm wound of entry measuring 0.5 c.m., in charging with blackening 3.0 c.m. Around on the left side of chest, 3 c.m. Lateral to midline at 4th intercostal space, a fire-arm wound of exit measuring 1.5 c.m. In diameter, margins everted, present at the inferior angle of the left scapula as a result of penetrating injury to the heart. The complainant also sustained injury at the time of incident and such medical certificate is available on record. According to the F.I.R., co-accused have been let off as they have not fired at the deceased, therefore, the case of the applicant/accused is distinguishable from the case of other accused. The applicant/accused Nisar Ahmed had opened straight fire on Shahnawaz, which hit him on his chest and the incident has taken place at 10-00 a.m. In the Court premises and he was arrested at the spot alongwith weapon. Although the applicant/accused is in custody since 9-6-2001 and the trial Court has not recorded evidence but applicant/accused cannot claim bail as a right on the point of continuous detention. He is not entitled for bail on merits. According to three (3) eye-witnesses active role of firing at the deceased has been assigned to him.
7. ' Resultantly, the Criminal Bail Application No,96 of 2003 is dismissed.
8. ' The trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial expeditiously without further delay. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.