MUHAMMAD HANEEF Versus State

ORDER

1. AMER RAZA NAQVI, J.--- Through this bail application applicant has sought bail in Crime No.72 of 2006 Police Station Taluka Nawabshah.

2. According to allegations complainant party was attacked by the accused persons including present application on 22-5-2006 at 0700 hours in morning and as a result two persons namely Nazir Ahmad and Shaukat Ali brothers of complainant died. So far as the allegation against the present applicant and one Abdul Latif is concerned, it is mentioned in the F.I.R. that "Muhammad Hanif (present applicant) and Abdul Latif fired in air at us for causing harassment".

3. Learned counsel submits that only allegation against the present applicant was of ineffective firing for causing harassment and 'no other role has been assigned to him by the complainant himself. Learned counsel further submits that in fact the applicant was found innocent by police and was released but subsequently on the application by complainant he was joined as accused in the case. Learned counsel states that in similar situation honourable Supreme Court has held that applicant is entitled to the grant of concession of bail. He referred 1996 SCMR 1654 in which bail was granted to the applicant who was armed with Pistol but did not fire. Learned counsel also relied upon 2007 SCMR 992 in which petition against order of High Court granting bail to a convict was dismissed. In the order of honourable High Court in similar situation the sentence was suspended. Learned counsel also relied upon 2008 SCMR 182 in which petition challenging the grant of bail by the High Court was dismissed. High Court had granted bail keeping in view of investigation of police in which it transpired that accused was present on duty in Primary School. Learned counsel states that in the present case also police came to similar conclusion and he has referred to a document filed at page 55.

4. Learned State Counsel, however, opposed the bail application on the ground that applicant is named in the F.I.R. and participated in the commission of this offence but does not dispute the police report filed by learned counsel for the applicant.

5. In view of the fact that the only allegation against the present applicant in the F.I.R. is that he fired in air in order to cause harassment. There is no other allegation against him and police found him innocent during the course of investigation. In view of above facts and circumstances I am of the view that applicant has made out a case for grant of concession of bail, accordingly bail is granted to him subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.200,000 (Rupees two lac only) with P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

6. H.B.T./M-145/K ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.