1995 P Cr (PLP)

Asghar Ali for Petitioner. Namat Khan for the State. Sardar petitioner being accused in case F.I.R. No.132, dated 9-4-1994 for offences under section 302/148/149, P.P.C. registered with Police Station City Pattoki, District Kasur has filed this petition for the grant of after arrest bail.

2. According to F.I.R. the petitioner and 5 others, namely, Khalid, Muhammad Zubair, Allah Rakha, Muhammad Jamil and Javed were standing at the place of occurrence. On seeing Muhammad Younas etc.; the petitioner raised Lalkara that Muhammad Younus should be taught a lesson for the abduction of Mst. Nasim Akhtar; upon this Muhammad Jamil and Muhammad Khalid accused fired with their respective mouzers which hit the deceased on the front side of the neck and his fingers of left hand; as a result Muhammad Younus fell down and was fired at by Allah Rakha causing injury on the back of left shoulder; Muhammad Younus died at the spot and the accused made good their escape alongwith arms while issuing serious threats to the complainant party.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no overt act except proverbial Lalkara had been attributed to the petitioner. He has argued that the petitioner is being involved in this case due to previous enmity and the allegations of hiring assassins is unfounded. He has further argued that the petitioner is a Government servant and as such he is entitled to the concession of bail.

4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed this bail application. He submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with the specific role and as such he is not entitled to the concession of bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length. Admittedly the present petitioner was empty-handed and the role-attributed to him is that of Lalkara. The Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in case of Muhammad Haroon and another v. The State 1994 SCMR 2161, the accused attributed the role of Lalkara was-released on bail. Similarly in the case of Rafiq Khan v. The State 1995 SCMR 343, the accused petitioner was guilty of raising Lalkara, the learned Judges of the Supreme Court converted the petition into appeal and directed the accused petitioner to be released on bail. Same view has been expressed in the case of Akbar Ali and others v. The State 1994 MLD 1291, in this case too the petitioner was attributed only Lalkara.

6. In view of the settled position of law enunciated by the Honourable Supreme Court and High Court, I am bound to follow the same. The petitioner is, therefore, directed to be released on bail subject to executing his bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Chunian, District Kasur. N.H.Q./S-697/L Bail allowed,