2001 P Cr (PLP)

Azizullah Buriro for Applicants. Inayatullah Morio for the State. As per allegation of the F.I.R., dated 19-2-1999 which was lodged at 9-00 hours with Mehar Police Station District Dadu, the complainant Muhammad Sadiq who alongwith four other persons was going from the Bus Stop to their residence at Gulshan Madina Colony they heard the noises of thief,' thief. It is further alleged that they saw two persons, one armed with gun and the other armed with revolver coming from that place; that the person armed with revolver fired at the complainant party which hit Ghulam Mohayuddin on the right side of his chest who fell down and died instantly. The other accused armed with gun fired which did not hit any person. It is alleged in the F.I.R., that this act of the said two persons were with the intention to kill the complainant party. In the above circumstances the aforesaid F.I.R., was lodged under sections 302, 324, 451 and 452/34, P. P. C. The present three applicants were arrested on 9-3-1999 and were produced for identification test on 20-3-1999 i.e., after the delay of 11 days: On 23-3-1999 challan was submitted against four persons showing one Bagho as absconder.- I have heard Mr. Azizullah Buriro for the applicant and Mr. Inayatullah Morio for the State. It is strenuously contended that there is no other piece of evidence connecting the present two applicants in the alleged offence except the identification test which was conducted after the delay of 11 days. It was further contended that this delay has caused loss to the evidentiary value of such identification test. It was further argued that no specific role was assigned to the accused persons. It is also argued that no recovery has been affected. Mr. Inayatullah Morio has supported this bail application and contended that in the F.I.R., the allegations have been levelled against two persons while challan has been tiled against four persons which has made the prosecution case a case of further enquiry. Mr. Azizullah Buriro has referred to.the cases of Hussain Bux v. The State -1994 PCr.LJ 508, Zahid v. The State 1998 PCr.LJ 45 and Muhammad Nazir v. The State 1999 MLI) 3253 and argued that in all these cases bail was granted to applicants/accused of heinous offences on the grounds that the identification test was conducted after much lapse of the time. Yet in another case Akhtar Muhammad v. The State 1987 PCr.LJ 2423 a learned single Judge of this Court Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui, J., (now Chief Justice of Pakistan) granted bail to the accused on the following grounds inter alia:-- " .... In the case before me applicant Akhtar Muhammad was put to identification test after 7 days of his arrest by the police while he was taken out of the custody on two occasions for remand before the Magistrate during this period. There is no explanation available in the police papers for this delay in holding the identification test of the accused except the bar statement of the learned A.A.-G., that it took time for the police to locate the witnesses in the case who were to identify the accused in the identification test?.." The aforesaid case-law fully attract in the circumstances of the present case and thus, the present applicants are entitled for bail as it is a fit case for further enquiry as provided under section 497, Cr.P.C. Accordingly B bail is granted to all the three applicants/accused upon furnishing of surety in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 (two lacs) each with P.R., Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. N.H.Q./I-18/K???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail allowed.