MUHAMMAD IQBAL Versus State

KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J .---Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., that he has been falsely implicated, that one Mehmood Ahmad, A.S.-I. made a supplementary statement in which he named the petitioner, that no recovery has been effected from the petitioner, that no source has been mentioned in the supplementary statement by Mehmood Ahmad A.S.-I. He further submits that three accused named in the F.I.R. were declared innocent but later on, S.P. Investigation had declared all of them including the present petitioner guilty in this case.

2. Learned State counsel submits that Mehmood Ahmad, A.S.-I. has named the petitioner on the next day of the occurrence, that he has been found guilty by the police and that offence committed by the petitioner is a heinous one.

3. Heard. In the instant case, 10 accused were named and some were shown to be unknown. Petitioner was not named in the F.I.R., he was named on the very next day of the occurrence by Mehmood Ahmad, A.S.-I. in his statement recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. stating therein that unknown accused, who are mentioned in the F.I.R., amongst them, petitioner was one the accused and he has also been making firing, except Mehmood Ahmad, A.S.-I. no other witness has named the petitioner and no recovery has been effected from him. To my mind, case of the petitioner is of further inquiry, falling under sub-clause (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, this petition is accepted. Petitioner is allowed bail subject to furnishing bail bonds to the tune of Rs.1,00,000 (One lac) two sureties in the like-amount to the satisfaction of D.R. (Judi) of this Court.

H.B.T./M-292/L Bail granted.