P L D 1993 Lahore 820 (PLP)

Against Muhammad Irshad petitioner a case under section 324, P.P.C., as also under section 7, Surrender of Illicit Arms Ordinance, 199-1 was registered at P.S. Margala, Islamabad, on 30-11-1992, at the instance of Yaser Shahzad Bhalli alias Tipu. His bail petition was dismissed on 24-5-1993 and 17-7-1993 respectively by Magistrate Section 30 (Rana Baqar Ali) and the learned Sessions Judge, Islamabad (Mr. Ali Nawaz Chohan). He has approached this Court for the same relief.

2. The complainant's sister, Iram Naz, after washing clothes, went up stairs, in order to spread the same in open on the roof. In the upper portion of the house lived Muhammad Irshad and Muhammad Aslam sons of Sadar-ud-Din as tenants. Irshad alone was present there and he started to Iram. Naz and cutting jokes with her. She admonished her. This infuriated Irshad, who with his revolver fired repeatedly at Iram Naz, hitting her in chest, in belly and on a shoulder. Screaming she rushed downstairs. On hearing her cries, the complainant, her brother, came out. He too was fired at twice by Irshad. The alarm attracted to the spot the neighbourers Muhammad Ashraf, his son Atif Aghraf and another person Ghulam Raza. They tried to intervene; but they too were fired at. All of them sustained fire-arm injuries at the hands of Muhammad Irshad, who tried to escape but was overpowered by Ashraf, Atif and Raza. Police was informed about the incident. Arif Hussain Shah Inspector/S.H.O., with other officials, arrived at the spot and apprehended the accused.

3. In these circumstances, it has not been possible for Irshad accused to plead absence from the spot and non-participation in the occurrence. His counsel has however, stated before me that actually the girl on roof was spotted having conversation her lover, a nerghbour, and this was conveyed by Irshad to the girl's brother Yaser Shahzad, who came upstairs and on obtaining Irshad's revolver he fired at the girl's paramour, who also retaliated. Neighbours too were attracted and in the cross-firing as many as five persons were injured.

4. This was not the plea of the petitioner before the lower Courts and it has been so invoked for the first time in this Court. It is obviously an after thought and manifestly an unplausible plea which does not at all appeal. to reason. Nobody from the other side was injured and all the persons on the side of the complainant suffered fire-arm injuries. If actually some one else was playing mischief with the girl, her brother was not supposed to have spared him, for he should have been the complainant's first target. Then there was no reason why the complainant should have falsely involved Irshad accused. The former should actually have been grateful to the latter for having made him aware of the miscreant, who was trying to cultivate familiarity with Iram Naz and might later have gone to the extent of enticing her away or molesting her.

5. The ground urged by the accused in the Courts below was his entitlement to the concession of bail by reason of non-submission of the challan over a long time. The learned Sessions Judge has made an observation in that regard, and that may not entirely be inapt. The police had no explanation to offer for withholding the challan, on conclusion of investigation, for that long period. According to the assessment of the learned Sessions Judge, the investigating agency might purposely have delayed submission of challan in order to benefit the accused The learned Civil Judge Ist Class/Magistrate Section 30 has rightly said that mere non-submission of challan or submission of an incomplete challan is not a ground that alone would justify enlargement of the accused, particularly in a case where the accused had acted in a most desperate and monstrous manner. Whosoever came across him, he fired at him, and not once, and very vital parts of the body of every person were hit. There could well have occurred deaths of several persons, had they not been lucky to have a narrow escape. The innocent girl, Iram Naz, her brother and three neighbours were fired at recklessly by the accused, without being afforded any real cause of grouse. There can hardly be any doubt about the fact that it was Irshad who had fired at all the five persons seriously injuring every one of them.

5. Even if the accused has been behind the bars over several months, he must not be released on bail, keeping in view the fact that he is a desperado, who powers such a temperament that in the event of his release he would continue to be on the rampage and would endeavor his utmost to deter the P.Ws. from deposing against him and would thus try to tamper with the prosecution evidence. I find absolutely no good ground for enlargement of the accused on bail and proceed to dismiss the petition. N.H.Q./M-1164/L BAIL REFUSED.