1988 P Cr (PLP)

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860) SS.302. 307 & 148/149‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10 & 11‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Accused not named in F.I.R.‑‑Abductee naming accused in her statement under 5.164, Cr.P.C. but attributing no role to him‑‑Case found to be of further inquiry‑‑Bail granted in circumstances. Muhammad Bashir Khan for Petitioner. Tasaddaq Hussain Gillani, A.A.‑G. for the State. This is a petition for bail on behalf of Khadim Hussain alias Ranjah son of Noor Muhammad, caste Boka in a case under sections 302/307/149/148, P.P.C. and section 10/11 Ordinance No. VII of 1979. He is being prosecuted alongwith Muhammad Nawaz and others for the abduction of Mst. Amiran and for the murder of Zahoor Ahmad and for murderous assault on Ghulam Rasool and other witnesses. The occurrence took place on 4‑7‑1984 at 12‑30 a.m. regarding which the F.I.R. was lodged a few hours therafter at 3‑00 a.m. by Allah Wasaya complainant.

2. It is contended by the learned counsel that Allah Yar, Rahim Bakhsh, Amira Faqir, Bala Baluch, Akbar Rangar, Gulama Wains, Neka Dogar and Ata Muhammad co‑accused of the present petitioner have already been allowed bail either by this Court or by the Session Court and that the case of the petitioner is identical to those accused firstly he is not named in the F.I.R. and secondly, that even Mst. Amiran in her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. did not attribute any role to him during or even after the occurrence. It is, therefore, argued that the petitioner be allowed bail in the instant case. The learned A.A.‑G. has argued that And Wadda P.W. in his statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. stated that Khadim Hussain petitioner and Khuda Bakhsh accused fired and injured him. This was corroborated by Ghulam Rasool, Sharif, Shakir, Arif and other witnesses. It is, therefore, argued that the petitioner is not entitled to bail.

3. I have considered the above contentions. The F.I.R. was recorded at the instance of Allah Wasaya, an eye‑witness. According to the F.I.R., Jind Wadda P.W. was injured only by Khuda Bakhsh accused of this case. Khadim Hussain petitioner was not even named, in the F.I.R. Mst. Amiran in her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C., no doubt named Khadim Hussain petitioner as one of the accused but did not attribute any role to him. I, therefore, find the case of present petitioner to be that of further inquiry. Khadim Hussain alias Ranjah son of Noor Muhammad petitioner is allowed bail on his furnishing of bail bond in sum of Rs,.20,000 (Rupees twenty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C . / Duty Magistrate, Lodhran. S. A . / K‑65/1, Bail granted.