2001 P Cr (PLP)

Shafi Muhammad for Applicants. Mehmood A. Qureshi for the Complainant. M. Ismail Memon for the State. The F.I.R. in this case was recorded for an offence under sections 337‑A, 147, 148 and 149, P.P.C. at K.I.A. Police Station on 22‑7‑2000 at 6‑30 p.m. on the basis of statement of victim of the offence namely Lal Afsar recorded under section 154, Cr.P.C As per contents of the F.I.R, the complainant namely Lal Afsar who was conductor on mini bus was attacked by his cousins namely Azizur Rehman, Mehfoozur Rehman, Talat Mahmood, Intizar Hussain, Nizar and Rukhsar who gave him blows with iron rods and after inflicting injuries on his head and also causing fracture of his leg took him away in their vehicle and when he regained senses he found himself in Jinnah Hospital. He disclosed in his statement that due to enmity arising out of his affair with a girl namely Nisbat daughter of Naheed he was beaten by the accused. The challan was submitted in the month of October, in which the applicants were booked for an offence under sections 337‑F(vi), 147, 148 and 149, P.P.C.

2. Mr. Shafi Muhammad, learned counsel for applicant contended that the body of complainant was allegedly secured from Qayumabad Nadi (river) which falls within Zaman Town Police Stations whereas the case has been registered in K.I.A. Police Station. He contended that the medical certificate shows that the victim was received at Jinnah Hospital on 21‑7‑2000, but according to F.I.R. the incident took place on 22‑7‑2000 which makes the case doubtful. According to him, enmity is admitted which is a ground for false implication. The challan was submitted after about two months, adding a new section but until then the applicants were on bail.

3. Mr. Mchmood A. Qureshi, learned counsel for complainant vehemently opposed the bail and submitted that the version in section 154, Cr.P.C. statement referring to time as 10‑30 p.m. actually speaks of the incident having taken place on the night between 21‑7‑2000 and 22‑7‑2000. The corresponding corrections were accordingly made in F.I.R. by the Investigating Officer. He further argued that the victim Lal Afsar and two eye‑witnesses Edi the driver of mini bus and one Mumtaz have fully supported the case of prosecution that the complainant was abducted. He also explained that since the original incident had taken place within the jurisdiction of K.I.A. Police Station, the F.I.R. was registered at that police station. According to him A.S.‑I. Habibur Rehman also supported the version of complainant. Mr. M. Ismail Memon learned State Counsel adopted the arguments of Mr. Mehmood A. Qureshi and opposed the bail plea.

4. I have perused the papers. The F.I.R. has been corrected at the top and the date has. been changed to 21‑7‑2000 but the text thereof still reads 22‑7‑2000. This fact is to be explained by A.S.‑I. Habibur Rehman who could give the time when he recorded the statement under section

154. Cr.P.C., but his statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. is totally silent on this point. The police diary also mentions the crucial date as 22‑7‑2000. I agree with learned counsel for complainant that such fact can be determined by the trial Court. However, the learned counsel for complainant referred to entry No.43 in Roznamcha of Police Station Zaman Town which reads that some unidentified vehicle had hit a motorcyclist who was found iii Qayumabad Nadi (river). This fact is also reflected in the statement of A.S.‑I. Habibur Rehman. In this manner at least two versions emerge from the police papers. True that the correctness of either of these versions will be resolved finally at the conclusion of the trial, but for the purpose of these proceedings. I art, convinced that at this stage the case requires further inquiry. As such the bail plea is accepted and the application is allowed. The applicants be released on furnishing one surety each in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 and executing P.R. Bond in the same amount to the satisfaction of Nazir of this Court. H.B.T./M‑164/K Bail granted.