Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: SAIF ULLAH VS Respondent: StateHonorable Justice Asif Saeed Khan KhosaImran Asmat Chaudhry,Zaheer-ul-Hassan Zaheer,Zaheer-ul-Hassan Zaheer
2005 M L D 839
2005 M L D 839 [Lahore] Before Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, J SAIF ULLAH---Petitioner versus THE STATE---Respondent Criminal Miscellaneous No.1257-B of 2005, decided on 4th March, 2005.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---F.I.R. showed that date, time and place of alleged murder was not known---Alleged occurrence had remained unwitnessed and neither deceased had been identified nor the culprits were known at the time of registration of F.I.R.---Prosecution was relying on the last seen evidence, recovery of blood-stained knife from possession of accused and extra-judicial confession allegedly made by him before prosecution witnesses so as to prosecute him for alleged murder---Brother of deceased, who had alleged that accused and others had been last seen in the company of deceased whereafter dead body of deceased was discovered by police, had not himself seen deceased in the company of accused---Statement of brother of deceased, post-mortem examination report and injury statement prepared by Investigating Officer, deceased had apparently sustained only fire-arm injuries---Recovery of a blood-stained knife from possession of accused, could not fit into original case of prosecution---Alleged extra-judicial confession was made by accused after about two months of registration of F.I.R.---Alleged extra-judicial confession had shown that deceased had been made to take some intoxicant before he was done to death, but prima facie medical evidence did not show presence of any intoxicant inside the dead-body of deceased---When alleged murder remained unwitnessed, worth and evidentiary value of said pieces of evidence which were relied upon by prosecution, would call for further probe---Challan, in case, had already been submitted after completion of investigation---Continued custody of accused in jail was not likely to serve any beneficial purpose---Case against accused calling for further inquiry into his guilt he was admitted to bail.
Imran Asmat Chaudhry for Petitioner. Zaheer-ul-Hassan Zaheer for the State. Tahir Mahmood, S.-I. with record.
ORDER Through this petition Saif Ullah petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.124 registered at Police Station Sadar Wazirabad, District Gujranwala on 7-5-2004 for an offence under section 302, P.P.C. 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has straightaway been observed by me that according to the F.I.R. the date, time and place of the alleged murder was not known, the alleged occurrence had remained unwitnessed and neither the deceased had been identified nor the culprits known at the time of registration of the F.I.R. On 8-5-2004 a brother of Muhammad Ilyas deceased namely Ghulam Abbas had submitted an application before the local police maintaining therein that the petitioner and others had been seen last in the company of Muhammad Ilyas deceased whereafter his dead body was discovered by the police. So far the prosecution is relying on the last-seen evidence, recovery of a blood-stained knife from the petitioner's possession and an extra-judicial confession allegedly made by the petitioner before Haji Muhammad Aslam and Talat P.Ws. so as to prosecute the petitioner for the alleged murder. The above mentioned application submitted by Ghulam Abbas before the local police on 8-5-2004 shows that the said Ghulam Abbas had not himself seen the deceased in the company of the petitioner. As regards the alleged recovery of a blood-stained knife from the petitioner's possession during the investigation of this case it has been noticed by me that according to the F.I.R., the statement made by Ghulam Abbas, the post-mortem examination report and the injury statement prepared by the Investigating Officer the deceased had apparently sustained only fire-arm injuries and, thus, recovery of a blood-stained knife from the petitioner's possession may not fit into the original case of the prosecution. As far as the extra-judicial confession allegedly made by the petitioner before the above mentioned witnesses is concerned it may be observed for the limited purposes of the present petition that the above mentioned witnesses had made their statements before the Investigating Officer regarding the alleged extra-judicial confession by the petitioner after above two months of registration of the F.I.R. It is also noticeable that according to the extra-judicial confession allegedly made by the petitioner the weapon of offence was a chhurri whereas, as already observed above, different pieces of evidence available on the record tend to show that the deceased had received only fire-arm injuries. Apart from that the extra-judicial confession shows that the deceased had been made to take some intoxicant before he was done to death but prima facie the medical evidence does not show presence of any intoxicant inside the dead body of the deceased. In these circumstances, especially when the alleged murder had admittedly remained unwitnessed, the worth and evidentiary value of the above mentioned pieces of evidence being relied upon by the prosecution calls for further probe at this stage. The challan in this case has already been submitted after completion of investigation and, thus, continued custody of the petitioner in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this juncture. 3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 4. Before parting with this order it may be clarified that the observations made in the present order shall always be treated as tentative in nature and the same shall not prejudice the learned trial Court in any manner.
H.B.T./S-325/L Bail granted.