2013 PLP 381 (YLR)

MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J.

The accused petitioner seeks his release on bail in case F.I.R. No.740 dated 19-7-2012 Police Station Pahari Pura, Peshawar under sections 302/ 148/149/109, P.P.C. after refusal of the said concession from the forum below.

2. According to the F.I.R. on 19-7-2012 the local police of Police Station Pahari Pura received information that a dead body is lying at the bank of canal in Pakha Ghulam Garhi Rahim Dad. On receipt of such information, the police rushed to the spot and found the dead body of deceased Sharif there where the complainant, brother of the deceased, reported the matter at 7-00 hours that his deceased brother Sharif on 17-7-2012 at 15-00 hours went out from his house and did not come back and charged unknown accused for commission of murder of his brother. Later on, on 23-8-2012 and 27-8-2012 the complainant in his statements under section 164, Cr.P.C. charged accused Khan Agha, Noor Agha, Haidar, Zrawar, Luqman alias Pehlawan (petitioner), Sher Ghani, Mst. Anwar Sultana and Mst. Aisha for the murder of his brother.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the F.I.R. was lodged by complainant against unknown persons but later on he charged petitioner along with other persons after delay of almost one month. He further argued that the petitioner has been nominated by co-accused Mst. Aisha and Mst. Anwar Sultana in their confessional statements recorded on 25-8-2012 but there is nothing on the record to connect him with the commission of offence; that the case of the petitioner requires further probe and requested for the release of petitioner on bail. Learned State counsel strongly opposed the bail application.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned State counsel and perused the record carefully.

5. Perusal of the record would reveal that no one was charged in the F.I.R. and it was an unseen occurrence. The accused petitioner was later on nominated as an accused in the case but there is nothing material on the record which would connect him with the commission of offence for which he is charged with. Learned State counsel referred to the mobile phone data collected by the I.O. and submitted that this would be sufficient to prima facie connect him with the commission of offence but in absence of any text of the said data, one cannot be said to have been involved in the commission of offence and involve-ment of accused petitioner for the commission of offence thus would call further probe.

6. Hence, this bail petition is allowed and the accused petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to furnishing bail bonds to the time of Rs.5,00,000 (Rupees five lacs) with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Illaqa Judicial Magistrate/Magistrate on duty. Let it be clear that the petitioner is an Afghan national; the sureties should be local and men of means. MWA/384/P Bail granted.