' SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J.--- Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order, dated 27-1- 2004, passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby the Criminal Miscellaneous Application No,118-B of 2004 filed by the petitioner was dismissed.
2. Accused-petitioner is facing trial in Crime No,209, dated 2-8-2002 of an offence under sections 302, 324, 148, 149, 109, P.P.C. Registered with Police Station, Kamalia, District Toba Tek Singh, at the behest of Nasrullah with the allegations that the present petitioner alongwith his co-accused Ali Raza, Zahoor Hussain Shah and Chan Shah armed with deadly weapons attacked the complainant party. Ali Raza Shah has been assigned the role of firing at Muhammad Afzal alias Shama, who later on, on the way to Hospital expired, while the role attributed to Yousuf is that he fired at Shama and caused injuries.
3. The bail concession to the present petitioner was declined by the learned Single Judge in Chamber solely on the ground that he is the real brother of Ali Raza Shah and son of Zahoor Hussain, who were involved in many cases of heinous nature and are at large, and the petitioner is involved in three cases i.e, F.I.R. No,155, Police Station, Arooti, F.I.R. No,165, Police Station Arooti and F.I.R. No,469, Police Station, Saddar Kamalia.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contended that the role attributed to the present petitioner is that of ineffective firing and empties from the Wardat were not even secured by the police; that there is cross version also; that the case of the present petitioner is at par with accused Chan Pir and Tazeeb-ul-Hassan to that of ineffective firing, who have been granted bail by the learned High Court.
5. Mr. Azhar Naveed Shah, learned Law Officer, has opposed the bail application.
6. We have considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and very carefully perused the available material Admittedly, co-accused Chan Pir and Tazeeb-ul-Hassan, who have been attributed the role of ineffective firing, have been allowed the concession of bail by the learned Single Judge in Chambers, but the present petitioner has been declined the concession of bail. The role attributed to him is one and the same. Mere registration of F.I.R. Against any person without conviction cannot be considered as a circumstance against him.
7. At this stage we are not inclined to discuss the merits of the case in detail which may cause prejudice to the case of either party. Prima facie case of the present petitioner is that of further inquiry. Accordingly, this petition is converted into appeal and allowed. Petitioner is allowed bail subject to his furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court.