2005 P Cr (PLP)

Ch. Faqir Muhammad for Petitioner. Rao Atif Nawaz, State Counsel with Muhammad Latif Ahmad, S.‑I. Police Station Gulgahsht, Multan. Through the instant petition, Mst. Gulzar Mai, petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No.327 of 2004 registered on 21‑7‑2004 under section 302/34, P.P.C. with Police Station Gulgasht, Multan on the complaint of one Mst. Kaneez Fatima widow of Ameer Bakhsh.

2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant/brother of the deceased got recorded F.I.R. under section 302/34, P.P.C. against the petitioner and his paramour for committing murder of her brother. The petitioner was arrested in this case after extra‑judicial confession made by her before the complainant. She admitted before the complainant that she and her paramour Zulfiqar Ali (absconder) have murdered the deceased by hanging him by neck. Her extra‑judicial confession was recorded on 27‑7‑2004 and on the, supplementary statement of the complainant, petitioner was arrested by the police on the said day. Since then she is in jail. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is innocent and she has been falsely involved in this case. There is no evidence except extra‑judicial confession to connect the petitioner with the commission of offence. The extra‑judicial confession is the weakest type of evidence and cannot be relied upon. The petitioner is a lady; her case falls within the proviso 1 of section 497, Cr.P.C. She is behind the bar since 28‑7‑2004; her minor children had been deserted. There is nobody to look after them. Reliance has been placed on 1982 PCr.LJ 529 and PLJ 1999 Criminal case (Lahore) 1.

3. Learned State Counsel states that extra‑judicial confession of the petitioner and her paramour was made before the complainant admitting to cause death of the deceased by hanging and the same is corroborated by the Medico‑legal report. He further states that challan has been submitted on 30‑8‑2004 but trial has not commenced. He further states that petitioner was nominated in. the F. I. R. on the very first, day and she does not deserve any concession under the law.

4. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties. On 28‑7‑2004 petitioner is stated to have made extra‑judicial confession before the complainant brother of the deceased wherein she implicated herself along with Zulfiqar Ali the co- accused. On the same day she was arrested by the police. No recovery of robe or any other material has been effected from the petitioner. The confessional statement made by the petitioner can prove to be a corroborative piece of evidence and cannot independently find the basis of conviction of the petitioner or the co‑accused. There is no direct evidence connecting the petitioner with the offence. The case of the petitioner is that of further inquiry.

5. Learned Additional Sessions Judge while dismissing the bail application merely relies on the ground that case of the petitioner falls under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. and thus, is not entitled to bail. Learned Additional Sessions Judge has failed to take note of the fact that bail application has to be disposed of within the framework of proviso 1 of section 497, Cr.P.C. He has ignored the proviso 1 of section 497, Cr.P.C. according to which aft; female is entitled to the discretion of the Court for the purpose of her admission to bail. Learned Additional Sessions Judge ignoring the rules of the superior Courts whereby the female accused have been made entitled to bail under section 497, Cr.P.C. cannot be proved especially, when it is a case of circumstantial evidence with respect to an un-witnessed occurrence.

6. Consequently, I accept this application and admit Mst. Gulzar Mai, petitioner/accused to bail subject to her furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court with the direction to appear before the learned trial Court on every date of hearing failing which she shall be liable to face the legal consequences. N. H. Q./G‑115/L Bail allowed.