2007 PLP 526 (MLD)

MUHAMMAD NAWAZ BHATTI, J.

Petitioner has sought his post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.145 of 2005, dated 9-5-2005 registered under sections 3021324/109/148/149,. P.P.C. at Police Station Saddar, Mian Channu District Khanewal.

2. Precisely the allegation against the petitioner as per prosecution story is that on the fateful day at about 3.45 p.m. uncle of the complainant Muhammad Akram was returning to his house, when he reached near Ihata of one Murad, Muhammad Riaz petitioner armed with fire-arm along with other co-accused who were also armed with different types of weapons was present there. Muhammad Iqbal co-accused raised a Lalkara that Muhammad Akram be taught a lesson to oppose Syed Farasat Hussain Shah. Abdul Aziz fired with his .12 bore gun directly at Muhammad Akram which hit on his chest and nose and he fell on the ground and expired. All the other co-accused also made tiring due to which co-accused Muhammad Iqbal and Abdul Aziz son of Abdul Majeed were also injured out of whom Muhammad Iqbal also died at the spot. Motive behind the occurrence is that Farasat Shah and Irshad Hussain had a dispute of land and Farasat Shah had called the accused from Fatehpur for taking possession of land and Farasat Shah had a suspicion that Muhammad Akram deceased had been supporting his opposing party.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case; that petitioner has not been attributed any specific role, no offence is made out against the petitioner, that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner and no motive has been ascribed to him; that case against the petitioner is that of further inquiry. That the petitioner is behind the bars and no more required by the local police for the purposes of investigation. Further submits that it s a case of two versions as cross-case was got registered against the complainant party of this F.I.R. and it is yet to be determined during trial as to which party was aggressor.

4. On the other hand learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the bail and submits that petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. and was declared guilty during the investigation.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record. Even in the F.I.R. petitioner Riaz had only been shown to be present at the spot while armed with fire-arm and no overt act has been assigned to him. Even no recovery had been effected from his possession and no motive has been attributed to him. Investigation in the case qua the petitioner is complete and petitioner is no more required by the police for the purposes of further investigation.

6. For what has been discussed above the petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (rupees one lac only) with one surety in the like amount of the satisfaction of learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-646/L Bail granted.