1. ' Applicants Passand, Niaz, Sher and Muhammad Khan are facing trial in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Dadu for allegedly committing offence punishable under sections 302, 324, 337, 147, 148, 149, 504, P.P.C. Their bail application stands rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Dadu vide order dated 8-8-2002, with the following observations:-- "I have gone through the F.I.R., challan and the police papers. I am clear in my mind that the applicants/accused though are not assigned with the fatal blow of causing death, however, the common object of rioting armed with deadly weapons and in the commission of causing injuries to other persons where in the same course of transaction deceased was murdered, the applicants/accused being burdened with common object cannot be segregated at this stage and the offence falls within the purview of prohibitory clause, hence their bail application is rejected."
2. ' Hence, this bail application is moved by the applicants.
3. ' Heard, Mr. Muhammad Hashim A. Chandio, Advocate for accused/applicants and Mr. Ali Azhar Tunio, Assistant Advocate-General for the State.
4. ' Complainant Qurban Ali Chandio lodged F.I.R. At Police Station Bhand Marri, District Dadu on 22-4- 2002 stating therein that he was serving as Hari on the land of one Meeral Lakhair who had a dispute with Mazan Chandio over the question of boundaries of their respective lands, pertaining to which a Faisla was conducted by Manzoor Chandio and Rais Anwar Din Chandio. On 22-11-2002 complainant alongwith Manzoor, Mumtaz, Altaf (his brothers) and Muhammad Aslam, his relative, went to the land for thrashing of the wheat and while the Thrasher was operative for such purpose, at about 10-00 p.m., accused Mazan, Niaz, Passand, Sher all sons of Muhammad Ilyas by caste Chandio duly armed with guns alongwith three unidentified culprits with their open faces, who were clearly seen on the head lights of tractor duly armed with guns and Lathis having reached there. Out of them, accused Mazan Chandio abused the complainant party immediately on reaching there, telling them that the accused party were having dispute over the land where on the complainant party were thrashing the wheat and, therefore, the accused party would not spare them on that night, and immediately thereafter co-accused Mazan fired his gun straight upon Muhammad Aslam, with intention to cause his death who thereby sustained injuries on his waist, raised cries and fell down on the ground; in the meanwhile other accused persons inflicted back sided hatchet blows and Lathi blcws and the blows of butts of the guns upon complainant's brothers namely Manzoor, Mumtaz and Altaf who thereby sustained injuries.
5. ' They all raised cries which attracted Roshan and Sajan who went running to the place of incident and entreated the accused party in the name of Allah to spare the complainant and others who were thereby rescued from further assault at the hands of accused party. They ran away while abusing the complainant party.
6. ' The above named injured persons were taken by the complainant and others to their Nekmard Rais Asghar Chandio in his village Aghamani and narrated the facts of the incident to him, who accompanied the complainant and others to the police station where complainant lodged the F.I.R.
7. Of this case.
8. ' Learned counsel for the applicants/accused has stated that name of applicant Muhammad Khan does not transpire in the F.I.R.; that there is no allegation against the applicants of having caused any injury to deceased Muhammad Aslam, that the 161, Cr.P.C. Statements of the P.Ws. Were recorded by the Investigating Officer after an inordinate delay of 23 days without any plausible explanation for such a delay viz. While F.I.R. Was lodged on 22-4-2002, 161, Cr.P.C. Statement of P.W.
9. Roshan was recorded on 3-5-2002, that of P.W. Sajan on 5-5-2002, that of P.Ws. Manzoor Ali, Mumtaz, Altaf and Zahoor were recorded on 15-5-2002 and that such aspect of the case indicates that possibility could not be ruled out that after having deliberations amongst themselves, the applicants were implicated by the complainant party falsely.
10. ' Learned counsel has further argued that the applicants are alleged to have inflicted blows of Lathis, backside of hatchets and butts of the guns on the persons of the witnesses and the F.I.R.
11. Does not allege any fire-arm injury having been inflicted by the applicants on the persons of the witnesses of the alleged incident of this case. He has cited a case-law reported in 1996 SCM R 1125, wherein Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan was pleased to admit the accused/applicants of the said case to bail with the following observations:-- "The petitioners alongwith 19 others are accused in F.I.R. No,174, dated 13-8-1993 registered at Police Station Jhand under sections 302/148/149 and 324/337-A(ii), P.P.C. Out of 25 accused in the case, 13 were enlarged on bail by the trial Court while another six were granted bail by the High Court on the ground that they, prima facie, shared common intention as they were armed with deadly weapons at the time of incident in a place of worship. Out of them, Mumtaz (petitioner No,1), Sher Afghan (petitioner No,2) and Muhammad Iqbal (petitioner No,3) were rightly refused bail in the case by the High Court as they allegedly caused injuries to the deceased Siddique Umer in the case. The cases of the remaining accused, namely, Ghulam Raza, Ghulam Shabbir and Zafar Iqbal, however, are distinguishable as in spite of being allegedly armed with deadly weapons like ritle, gun and hatchet, they only caused simple blunt injuries to some of the P.Ws., using the wrong side of their weapons. In these circumstances, whether they share common intention with those who caused death of deceased Siddique Umar needs further enquiry.
12. ' We, accordingly, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and the State convert it into appeal and admit Ghulam Raza son of Ghulam Mohyuddin, Ghulam Shabbir son of Ghulam Yousaf and Zafar Iqbal son of Mehdi Khan to bail on condition of furnishing two sureties in the sum of Rs,25,000 by each of them to the satisfaction of trial Court."
13. ' The factual position as contended/argued by learned counsel for the applicants from the police papers is not controverted by the learned Assistant Advocate-General with regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the witnesses of the incident and dates of record of their 161, Cr.P.C.
14. Statements. Keeping in view the above-quoted judgment passed by Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan, the applicants are admitted to bail each in the sum of Rs,1, 00,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of this Court.
15. ' A short order was passed to the above effect in this bail application on 2-12-2002 and above are reasons for the same.