SAFDAR ALI vs THE STATE

ORDER

' M. BILAL KHAN, J.--- Safdar Ali son of Mukhtar Ahmad, the petitioner, by filing this petition, seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,459 of 2006 dated 9-5-2006, registered with Police Station Satiana, District Faisalabad for offences under sections 302, 324/34 read with section 109, P.P.C.

2. The facts of this case have already been given in some detail in my order passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No,10163-B of 2006, while granting post-arrest bail to Muhammad Younas, the co- accused of the petitioner, therefore, the need not be reiterated here once again.

3. The plea of the petitioner for post-arrest bail did not find favour with the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad, who turned down his application vide order dated 11-8-2007. Hence this petition.

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it has been observed that initially the name of the petitioner did not feature on the F.I.R. And that it had surfaced for the first time in the supplementary statement made by the complainant on 20-7-2006 wherein he had resiled from his earlier statement made in the F.I.R. And had stated that he had got the aforesaid case registered against the accused mentioned in the F.I.R. But during the course of his secret inquiry, he had satisfied himself that the accused mentioned in the F.I.R. Were not involved in the murder of his brother Shah Muhammad alias Shahra and that actually Karam Mahmood, Zulfiqar, armed with double barrelled guns, Safdar, Afzal, armed with carbines .12-bore, Muhammad Yousaf alias Deputy, armed with Pump Action gun, Maqsood Ahmad, armed with .12 bore gun and Muhammad Younas armed with rifle .44 bore had been indulging in firing from the rooftop of their house, whereas Naik Muhammad armed with rifle .44 bore, Abdul Jabbar, Muhammad Yar, armed with .12 bore guns, Zahoor Ahmad, armed with Sota, Sana Ullah and Akhtar Abbas, armed with carbines had been firing from the other side; his brother Shah Muhammad alias Shahra, who was standing on the rooftop of the house of Karam Mahmood, was also resorting to firing and all of a sudden, a fire shot made by Safdar Mahmood son of Mukhtar Ahmad petitioner through his carbine .12 bore hit Shah Muhammad alias Shahra on his head near left ear, who fell down and succumbed to his injury.

5. Supplementary statement is always considered to be a weak type of evidence as held by this Court as also by the apex Court time and again. Needless to add that in the F.I.R. The names of the accused persons with the specific roles played by them had been mentioned with mathematical precision. It was after a period of seventy two days that a supplementary statement, as stated elsewhere, had been got recorded, which reveals that the complainant took a `U' turn and completely exonerated the accused persons mentioned in the F.I.R. By substituting them with the present petitioner and his co-accused with specific roles. This circumstance by itself is sufficient to render the case of the petitioner one of further inquiry within the meanings of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.

6. Resultantly this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

7. The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and are not designed to influence the course of trial in any manner.