Law:

Section:

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/148/149---Qatl-e- amd---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---There were only two entry and two exit wounds and one wound which was on head of the deceased, was allegedly caused by co-accused and the other one was on the arm---There were 18 accused in the case and it was not determined as to how many of them fired, because no empties had been recovered from the site---Was not determined as to whose fire hit the deceased---Case being of further inquiry, accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Faraz Akram v. The State 1999 SCMR 1360; Syed Amanullah Shah v. The State PLD 1996 SC 241 and Muhammad Saeed Mehdi v. The State, 2002 SCMR 282 ref. Asif Ali Abdul Razak Soomro for Applicants. Nisar Ahmed G. Abro for the State. ORDER SHAHID ANWAR BAJWA, J.---F.I.R. No. 58 of 2009 was registered at Police Station Lakhi Ghulam Shah on 14-4-2009, at 1230 hours, for an incident alleged to have occurred on 13-4-2009, at 6-00 p.m. The complainant was one Mst. Dana Khatoon. She stated that her family had dispute over women with one Shah Dost Brohi. On the fateful day, while the complainant along with her daughter-in-law, daughter and grandson was coming for medicines and as they reached lands of Muhammad Ameen Bhutto near Lakhi, they saw 20 persons including present application No.1 (at No.10), application No.2 (at No.12) and applicant No.3 (at No.13). One accused Shah Murad gave hakal and told grandson of the complainant the he would be killed. Saying so Shah Murad fired from his K.K., which hit grandson on right eyebrow and exited through the head. Thereafter, Bahadur fired from his rifle, which hit on the backside of neck of grandson. Thereafter, it is alleged that the other accused persons fired from their respective weapons with intention to commit murder which hit on his right arm. Bail application was filed in the Court below, which was dismissed vide order, dated 27-1-2010 for the following reasons:-- "I have considered the arguments made before me by the learned counsel for the accused as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and perused the case papers…