1988 PLP 652 (MLD)

A case under section 302/34 read with section 109 P.P.C. stands registered against the petitioner and some others with Police Station Piplan, District Mianwali. The case was got registered by Dilbar Hussain on 18‑2‑1988 for the murder of Muhammad Aleem, real brother of the first informant. The allegation, as contained in the F.I.R., is that on 18‑2‑1988 at about 11 a.m., the first informant was present in the hotel of one Muhammad Rafiq; he saw his cousin Shaukat Ali, therefore, he came on the road in order to meet him while his brother Muhammad Aleem kept on sitting in the said hotel. In the meanwhile, co‑accused of the petitioner armed with various fire‑arms are alleged to have come in the said hotel, and on the Lalkara of a co‑accused of the petitioner another co‑accused is alleged to have fired with his automatic pistol hitting on the back of Muhammad Aleem, whereupon he fell down. The first informant and Shaukat Ali, P.W., tried to intervene but were threatened by another co‑accused of the petitioner, namely, Muhammad Nawaz. After the commission of the offence, all the accused managed to run away. The motive for the occurrence is stated to be that about 1‑1/2 years prior to the occurrence a daughter of Muhammad Sharif petitioner's co‑accused was abducted who suspected the first informant and his brother Muhammad Aleem, deceased. It is also contained in the F.I.R. that the present occurrence has been committed on the instigation and abetment of the petitioner.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no evidence available on the record against the petitioner. Submits that the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the offence is highly doubtful. Urges that there is no motive on the part of the petitioner to have conspired with the co‑accused for the murder of Muhammad Aleem. The petition has been opposed by learned counsel for the State.

3. I have heard the learned counsel at length and perused the record. The only evidence available against the petitioner so far, collected by the police, are statements of Shamshad Ahmed and Feroz Din. According to the statement of Shamshad, on 14‑2‑1988 when he was present in his sugar‑cane field, he heard the petitioner telling Muhammad Sharif, co‑accused, that he is after the sons of Rehmat Lambardar but he has not been successful so far. He is further alleged to have said that he would help him. The co‑accused of the petitioner is alleged to have said that very soon he would hear that one of the sons of the said Rehmat Khan is finished. On seeing the witness, both of them kept quiet. Similarly, Feroze Din has stated in his statement that on 9‑2‑1988 while he was present in his orchard, he heard the petitioner asking Muhammad Sharif, his co‑accused, to kill one of the sons of Rehmat Khan, Lambardar to take revenge for his insult and he would help him. It is strange that the occurrence took place on 18‑2‑1988, when the alleged instigation is on 9‑2‑1988 and 14‑2‑1988, but both the witnesses did not bother to inform the first informant regarding the hatching of such a conspiracy. Both of them have not said a word that they warned the deceased or the first informant regarding the intentions of the accused persons. Without going deep into the appraisal of the statements of the witnesses recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., I feel it is a case of further inquiry as far as the petitioner is concerned. Therefore the petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs. 30,000 with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Mianwali. SA./M‑145/L?? Bail allowed.