1. This order will dispose of bail application filed by the above named applicant arising out of Crime No,19 of 2001 being Sessions Case No,29 of 2002 pending in the Court of learned find Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana.
2. The facts giving rise to the present application are that on 3-8-2001 at 7-00 p.m. injured Ahmed Shah reached at the Otaq after leaving his sister when applicant Buland Shah armed with hatchet and Hakim Shah armed with Lathi and two other persons armed with Lathis gave Hakals to the injured. Then the applicant Buland Shah caused hatchet injury with the sharp side of hatchet to the injured -Ahmed Shah whereas the applicant Hakim Shah and remaining culprits caused Lathis injuries to him and then the culprits ran away. The co-accused Iqbal Shah moved a bail application before the trial Court, which was dismissed. He then, moved a bail application before this Court, which was granted vide order, dated 1-10-2002. The present applicants also moved a bail application before the trial Court, which was dismissed under the impugned order. The applicants were dissatisfied with the said order, therefore, they have preferred this application.
3. I have heard the Advocate for the applicants and Assistant A.-G. for the State and perused the record of this case very carefully.
4. The learned Advocate for the applicants has stated that the injured has levelled allegation that he had received injuries with sharp side of hatchet blow caused by the applicant Buland Shah, but his evidence is in conflict with medical certificate, as according to the medical certificate the injured had not received any injury caused by sharp side of hatchet, but all the injuries were caused by hard and blunt substances. He has further argued that co-accused Iqbal Shah, against whom the allegation of causing Lathi injuries was made has been, granted bail by this Court, therefore, the case of the applicants is similar to that of co-accused, as such, on the rule of consistency the applicants may be granted bail.
5. The learned Assistant A.-G. has conceded that there is conflict between medical and ocular evidence; that the medical certificate shows that all the injuries were caused by hard and blunt substance, and that on the same allegation the co-accused Iqbal Shah was granted bail by this Court, therefore, the case of the present applicants is similar to that of co-accused, hence he has got no objection to the grant of bail.
6. The record supports the above contentions. There is conflict between medical and ocular evidence.
7. The medical officer did not' find any sharp side hatchet injury on the person of the injured as all the injuries were found to have been caused by hard and blunt substance. The co-accused Iqbal Shah on the similar circumstances has already been granted bail by this Court, therefore, on the rule of consistency, the applicants are entitled for the concession of bail.
8. In view of the above position, bail is granted to the applicants in the sum of Rs, one lac each on furnishing solvent sureties with PR bond in the like amount, to the saps faction of the trial Court.
9. Application is allowed.