1990 P Cr (PLP)

Mirza Muhammad Rashid Ahmad Raza for Petitioner. Shaukat Hussain for the State. Mst. Naziran petitioner, who is involved in a case under section 302/364, P.P.C. arising out of F.1.R. No.335/88, dated on 27-12-1988, registered at Police Station Haveli, District Okara, seeks to be admitted to bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner was that after kidnapping her minor daughter Mst. Khalida aged about 7/8 years, she killed her. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of this bail application raised the following contentions:-- (i) That it was an unwitnessed crime. The only evidence against the petitioner is that of extra-judicial confession and recovery of her ear rings on 30-12-1988 but there is nothing on the record to show that these articles belong to the complainant, because, these are of ordinary pattern and are easily available in the market. (ii) That the prosecution version that the dead body of the deceased was recovered from the canal on 31-12-1988 at the pointation of the petitioner is quite unrealistic and unimaginable because, water was flowing therein.

3. Learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application.

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I find substance in the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, because there is no direct evidence to connect her with the crime. The only evidence against the petitioner A is that of extra-judicial confession, and the recovery of ear-rings, and the recovery of dead body on the pointation of the petitioner, which was later on identified by the complainant.

5. Without going into the merits and demerits of the case, I find there was no apparent justification for the petitioner to confess her guilt before the persons who were neither Numberdars nor the B.D. members. The recovery of ear-rings from the petitioner does not advance the case of the prosecution. According to the prosecution the dead body was recovered after 3/4 days from a place where the petitioner threw it, in spite of the fact that canal had running water. It is highly improbable how the dead body remained there in spite of the fact that it was not tied down with some heavy substance which prevented the dead body to float in the water. In the normal circumstances it should not have been recovered from that place. In the above circumstances, the case against the petitioner is of further inquiry. Accordingly the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A.C., Okara. SA./N-331/L Bail granted.