ABDUL WAHEED Versus State

ORDER

1. AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J.--- This bail application has been filed by applicants Abdul Waheed and Zahid Hussain, both by caste Sabzoi, in Crime No.42/2014 of Police Station B-Section, Kandhkot, under Sections 302, 324, 148, 149, P.P.C. Their similar request was turned down by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Kandhkot vide orders dated 25.8.2016 and 04.10.2016, respectively.

2. Brief account of the prosecution case is that on 20.4.2014 the applicants/ accused along with co-accused named in the FIR, duly armed with K. Ks and guns, intercepted the complainant Mohammad Hassan, his father Rahim Bux, brothers Nazar Hussain and Addab Hussain and their mother Mst. Shabiran near Otaq of accused Abdul Sami Sabzoi at about 5.00 p.m., while they were going to Kandhkot town and accused Abdul Fatah alias Mir fired at complainant's brother Nazar Hussain resulting in his death, while accused Abdul Sami fired at complainant's father Rahim Bux, who sustained injuries. On 21.4.2014 complainant went to police station and lodged FIR, stating that there was dispute between both parties over land.

3. Learned Counsel for the applicants, inter alia, contends that enmity between the parties over land is admitted in the FIR; that there is inordinate delay of more than 24 hours in lodging the FIR without any plausible explanation; that all the prosecution witnesses are related to each other and members of one and same family; that no overt act is attributed to the applicants; that case against the applicants calls for further enquiry. Lastly, learned Counsel contends that co-accused Mohammad Qasim and Mohammad Hashim, whose case is altogether identical to that of the present applicants, have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04.7.2016, therefore, on the rule of consistency the applicants are entitled to same relief.

4. Conversely, learned Counsel for the complainant opposes the bail application on the ground that the applicants are nominated in the FIR; that the incident is of broad daylight and that the accused persons are avoiding to proceed with the trial, where evidence of almost eight prosecution witnesses has been recorded but cross-examination of some of the P.Ws has not been made by the learned advocate representing the accused.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Prosecution General does not oppose the grant of bail to the applicants on the ground of rule of consistency.

6. Perusal of record shows that enmity between the parties over land is admitted in the FIR, which is also evident from the fact that the complainant has implicated all the male members of one and same family in the instant case. There is also delay of one day in lodgment of FIR, for which complainant has not furnished any plausible explanation. No overt act is attributed to the present applicants. Co-accused Mohammad Qasim and Mohammad Hashim have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 04.7.2016 passed in Crl. Bail Application No.S-92 of 2016 (certified true copy of said order has been placed on record. In such circumstances, the present applicants are also entitled to same relief on the principle of consistency and equal treatment.

7. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed. The applicants are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.300,000 (Rupees Three Lac only) each and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

8. WA/A-79/Sindh Bail granted.