2006 PLP 2479 (YLR)

MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, J.

Sajid Saleem has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.146 registered at Police Station Kot Samabah on 20-4-2004 for offences under sections 302/393, P.P.C.

2. The relevant facts per F.I.R. are that at about 3-00 p.m. on 20-4-2002, Haji Bashir Ahmad, brother of the complainant, who was on a motor-cycle, was stopped by three persons. When Haji Bashir Ahmad stopped the motor-cycle, the three accused, who were not previously known to the complainant and the P.Ws. tried to take out the key of the motor-cycle. When Bashir Ahmad resisted, two of the accused, who were armed with pistols, fired at him. Thereafter the accused left the scene of occurrence. Haji Bashir Ahmad died on the spot. On 19-10-2004, supplementary statement of complainant and the statements of Imam Bakhsh and Lal Bakhsh, P.Ws. were recorded wherein it was stated that they had seen the three accused, including the petitioner, committing the murder of a motor-cycle rider; however, the P.Ws. were threatened by the accused to keep quiet, so they did not inform anyone about the occurrence. According to Imam Bakhsh and Lal Bakhsh, P.Ws. they had narrated the story to the complainant after arrest of the petitioner in some other case.

3. The petitioner, who was arrested in some other case, was formally arrested in the instant case and while in custody, he led the I.O., Muhammad Ibrahim complainant and Muhammad Ismail, P.W., to the place where the accused stopped the deceased and had tried to snatch his motor-cycle.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the relevant record of the case.

5. It has been noticed that though it was claimed in the F.I.R. that the complainant could identify the assailant yet no identification parade was held in the case; that the statements of Lal Bakhsh, Imam Bakhsh and the supplementary statements of complainant were recorded after six months of the, occurrence. The credibility of their statements would be determined by the learned trial Court after recording of their statements on oath. As far as the evidence of pointation of the place where the deceased was stopped and where the accused had tried to snatch the motor-cycle is concerned, prima facie, the same is not admissible in evidence and that question, too, would be determined by the learned trial Court. In the above-noted circumstances, the allegations qua the petitioner need further probe and inquiry within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Thus, I admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of rupees one lac with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./S-97/L Bail granted.