1995 PLP 1228 (MLD)

Sheikh Ehsan Ahmad for the State. Nadeem Arshad petitioner being accused of case F.I.R. No. 277 dated 3‑7‑1994 under section 302/148/149, P.P.C. Police Station Saddar Gujrat has approached this Court for the grant of bail after refusal of the same by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat vide order 7‑11‑1994.

2. According to the F.I.R. on 3‑7‑1994 Abdul Jabbar nephew of the complainant was standing on the gate of house of Muhammad Aslam, his brother when Tractor No. SA. 4212 being driven by Qaisar Mehmood came. There, the tractor was stopped and the driver was asked to pass through from the pipes with care; Qaisar Mehmood stopped the tractor there and rushed to tell Saleem Arshad, a sand contractor. After a short while, Muhammad Arshad armed with 12 bore double‑barrel gun, Shakeel armed with 222 bore rifle, Nadeem Arshad empty‑handed, Naeem Arshad with 12 bore gun, Qamar Maqsood armed with .12 bore gun and Sajjad armed with 12 bore gun canie abusing. Saleem Arshad while abusing asked as to who has stopped the trolly, the deceased told that the tractor was stopped to make the driver understand to pass from the pipes with care; upon this Saleem Arshad fired a shot with .12 bore double‑barrel gun which hit on the chest (left side) of Abdul Jabbar; later companions of Saleem Arshad also made ineffective firing.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner was empty‑handed and did not cause any injury either to the deceased or to any person rather did not take in the alleged occurrence. According to him, the petitioner did not share the common intention. He next contended that net has been widened to almost implicate the male members of the family of the petitioner.

4. In support of the submission, learned counsel relied on 1993 MLD 2473 and 2548, 1993 P Cr. L J 2242 and 2460, PLD 1978 SC 326 and 1981 SCMR 1092.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the petition. He argued that as the challan has been submitted in Court, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.

6. Saleem Arshad main accused, father of the petitioner is proclaimed offender and non‑bailable warrants for arrest has been issued by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Learned counsel for the complainant has produced on record a certified copy of F.I.R. No. 349 dated 19‑6‑1992 under section 324 of Qisas and Diyat Ordinance read with section 148/149, P.P.C. registered with Police Station Civil Lines, Gujrat in which the present petitioner his brother and father were specifically named with specific role. It has also been pointed out that the father of the petitioner is accused in a murder case registered with Police Station Kunjah. A case under section 392, P.P.C. has also been registered against the petitioner and his brother with Police Station Sadar Gujrat vide F.I.R. No. 352 dated 8‑9‑1994 in which complainant is father of the deceased. Whole family of the petitioner prima facie appears to be hardened criminals. The facts of the precedents cited by the learned counsel are distinguishable. Further, the case is before the learned trial Court and next date is fixed for 25‑1‑1995.

7. In these circumstances, I find no justification to grant the relief prayed for in a murder case.

8. It may be observed that judiciary being an important limb of the State is to put a check in granting bail to the accused in cases of heinous offences especially when they are involved in various criminal cases.

9. For what has been discussed above, this petition stands dismissed. N.H.Q./N‑311/L ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail refused.