2002 PLP 1071 (MLD)

Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner. Khan Atta Ullah Khan Tareen for the State. Date of hearing: 22nd October, 2001. Mst. Qurra‑tul‑Ain alias Salma, petitioner, has sought her post arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No.126 of 2001, dated 18‑7‑2001 under sections 302/201/34, P.P.C. Police Station Fateh Sher, Sahiwal.

2. According to the, story as given in the F:I.R., Ghulam Dastgir deceased was living in Chichawatni with his second wife, while he had also married with Mst. Salina petitioner, who was his third wife and was resident of Farid Town Sahiwal. The relation between the deceased and Mst. Salma petitioner were strained for the last 6/7 years and the petitioner was living separately at Sahiwal. On the fateful day, the complainant, who is nephew of the deceased, was summoned by the deceased to settle the matter with Mst. Salina. The complainant alongwith Ghulam Dastgir, deceased, went to Sahiwal and reached at about 9‑00 p.m. at the residence of Khawar Ali, where Tariq Javed and Sabir Ali alongwith Mst. Salina were present Ghulam Dastgir deceased asked Mst. Salina to accompany him but she asked for divorce and share of the property. Therefore, hot words were exchanged between the deceased and Mst. Salina. Allegedly Mst. Salma exhorted Lalkara that Ghulam Dastgir should be done to death. Sabir Ali and Tariq Javed, who were allegedly armed with sota and pistol respectively caused injuries to the deceased, which proved fatal.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The learned State counsel has opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was the principal accused. She had a motive. She was instrumental in the death of Ghulam Dastgir, as the co‑accused only obeyed her command. He has also contended that the challan has been sent up for trial and that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. as accused.

4. Admittedly, the petitioner had no knowledge whatsoever that her husband would appear at the house of Khawar Ali at that time. The petitioner was empty‑handed. Only a proverbial Lalkara has been attributed to her. She is also a woman and her case is covered by the proviso‑I to section 497, Cr.P.C. The allegation against the petitioner needs further probe and inquiry, therefore, I am inclined to allow this petition and admit the petitioner to bail, subject to her tendering bail bonds in the sum of Rs. ten thousand, with one surety in the like amount A to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./I‑13/L Bail granted.