1997 PLP 2575 (MLD)

Masood Sadiq Mirza for the State. Date of hearing: 19th December, 1994. The petitioners, who are involved in a case under section 302, P.P.C. arising out of F.I.R. No.167/93 dated 21‑7‑1993 registered at Police Station Silanwali, District Sargodha, seek to be admitted to bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that they caused the intentional death of Allah Ditta by giving him hatchet and Churri blows.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that it is an unwitnessed crime. The only evidence against the petitioners is of extra judicial confessions allegedly made by them before Gulzar Ahmad and Zulfiqar Ahmad, who are the close relations of the deceased and there is no corroborative evidence available on the record to connect the petitioners with the crime, thus, the case against the petitioners is .one of further inquiry, as it would be determined after the recording of some evidence whether actually the petitioners committed the crime or not. In the end, he submitted that the petitioners are behind the bars since 22‑3‑1994 and 22‑2‑1994 respectively without there being any meaningful progress in the trial.

4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed this bail application but conceded this fact that the petitioners are not nominated accused in the F.I.R. and it is a blind murder case. He further submitted that the petitioners allegedly made extra judicial confessions before Gulzar Ahmad and Zulfiqar Ahmad after three days of the occurrence but said Ghulzar Ahmad and Zulfiqar Ahmad did not make any statement before the police till 9‑2‑1994. He submitted that the petitioners are involved in a case which falls within the prohibitory clause and the petitioners are not entitled to the grant of bail.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Admittedly, the petitioners are not nominated accused and none has seen the occurrence. The only evidence against the petitioners is of extra‑judicial confession allegedly made by them after three days of the occurrence but the persons to whom this alleged extra judicial confession was made are the close relations of the deceased. Gulzar Ahmad being brother‑in‑law and Zulfiqar Ahmad son of Gulzar Ahmad. Both the abovementioned witnesses did not mention this fact to the police immediately, but informed the police on 9‑2‑1994 whereas the occurrence took place between the night of 20/21‑7‑1993. In the presence of this evidence, the case against the petitioners seems to be one of further inquiry, as it would be determined after the recording of some evidence whether actually the petitioners are involved in a case which falls within the prohibitory clause or not, so, the petitioners are admitted td bail subject to furnishing them surety bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rs.fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. Sargodha. N.H.Q./N‑347/L ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail allowed.