1994 P Cr (PLP)

5. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/328/ip9/34

Bail, grant of-- Accused could not be shown to have been linked with the crime

Unexplained delay of one month and eleven days in lodging the F.I.R. was enough to cast serious doubt upon the prosecution case and reasonable ground existed for believing that the accused might not have committed the offence

Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. Syed Raza Hussain Naqvi and Sahibzada Muhammad Munir Abbasi for Petitioner. Najam-ul-Hassan Gill for the State. Liaqat Ali complainant had reported to police on the 6th of May, 1988, that he had noticed two young men of his village, namely, Baqir Ali Shah and Rehmat Ali writhing with pain after having taken something. The complainant alongwith his co-villagers took both of them to hospital for treatment but they breathed their last in the way. An F.I.R. was, however, registered with Police Station Wahndo, District Gujranwala, on the 17th of June, 1988, under section 302/328/109/34, P.P.C., on the statement of the said complainant that he had seen the petitioner and his co-accused Safdar Hussain serving syrup to both the deceased who shortly afterwards became unconscious and died. According to the complainant, the death was caused due to some poisonous material administered to them by the petitioner and his co-accused. 2: The Sub-Inspector of the police station found the petitioner innocent and the D.S.P. (Circle) also came to the same conclusion on the 18th of August, 1988. Subsequently on transfer of the investigation, the S.H.O., Gakhar, also declared the petitioner and his co-accused innocent and recommended cancellation of the case. Thereafter, the complainant filed a private complaint in the Court of the Ilaqa Magistrate on the 8th of October, 1988, which was heard by Mr. Mahmood Khalid, Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala, who, however, directed the police to finalize the State case and submit the challan. It was then that the challan was submitted in the said Court accusing the petitioner of the offence.

3. The learned State counsel has failed to lay hand upon any tangible material linking the petitioner with the crime. Unexplained delay of one month and eleven days in lodging the F. I. R.in presence of report No. 13, dated the 6th of May, 1988, is adequate enough to cast serious doubt upon the proceqution case and there appears responsible ground for believing that the petitioner may not have commited the offence. In the circumstances of these case, the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs. 50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court where the challan has been submitted but the trial has not yet commenced. The observation made in this order shall obviously not affect the merits of the main case. N.H.Q./A-475/L Bail allowed.