1999SCMR2148 (PLP)

RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN, J.

On 23-5-1997, a case under section 302, P.P.C. was registered with Police Station Harbans Pura, Lahore on the statement of Abdul Rashid against Amanat Ali for the murder of Mst. Rozina alias Rabia hereinafter called Mst. Rozina.. It is alleged that Mst. Rozina was set on fire by her husband Amanat Ali, the petitioner. In the result, she died. An Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore admitted the petitioner to bail on 14-7-1997 on the ground that the case against him was one of further inquiry. This bail order was, however, set aside by the High Court on 19-3-1998 and the bail of the petitioner was cancelled. This is a petition for leave to appeal against the said order.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no evidence to connect the petitioner with the commission of the crime. The victim, Mst. Rozina was declared by the doctor to be unfit for making any statement till her death.

3. Be that as it may, we hold the view that this is a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner. Discretion in this behalf was rightly exercised by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in lieu of cogent reasons. It is useful to quote I the, operative part of the order of Additional Sessions Judge, which is to the following effect:- "From the perusal of record is found that the father (Allah Rakha) of the present petitioner and father in law of the deceased has also suffered burn injuries in the same incident. The record shows that he tried to save her. Allah Rakha has sworn in an affidavit to the effect that Amanat Ali is not responsible for the present occurrence. The record also shows that doctor observed in his reports dated 20-5-1997/21-5-1997 and 22-5-1997 that the deceased Mst. Rabla Begum is not fit for statement. The present F.I.R. was registered at the instance of Abdur Reshid real father of the deceased. Even he has stated in the F.I.R. that Mst. Rabia Begum remained unconscious from 20-5-1997 till her death. Therefore, any statement mounting to dying declaration of the deceased appears to be out of question. The present petitioner Amanat Ali is real husband of the deceased. His bail before arrest was dismissed by this Court on 27-6-1997 and he was arrested by the Police. He remained in police custody and on the request of the police he has been sent to the judicial lock up. At this stage, his person is no more required nor anything is to be recovered from him. Therefore, his detention shall not serve any lawful purpose. Thus, the case of further inquiry is made out in favour of the petitioner. So, his petition for post arrest bail is accepted and he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bound in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of this Court. " There was, therefore, no justification with the High Court to recall that well ?reasoned order. In the circumstances, we restore the above order of the Additional Sessions Judge and set aside that of the High Court The petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 (rupees two lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. With this observation, this petition is converted into appeal and allowed. N.H.Q./133/S????????????? Bail allowed. ?