ZAFAR IQBAL Versus THE STATE

ORDER

Petitioner seeks bail in the case registered against him and two others under section 302/34, P.P.C. at Police Station Mitha Tiwana, district Khushab on 29-5-1987.

2. According to F.I.R. the shot fired by Yar Muhammad co-accused of the petitioner at Alam Sher, had gone ineffective but the shots fired by the petitioner and his co-accused Umar Hayat had struck the deceased on his head.

3. Motive for the occurrence, according to F.I.R. was that Umar Hayat co -accused of the petitioner had developed illicit relations with the wife of Alam Sher deceased who had stopped him from visiting his house.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that motive has not been assigned to the petitioner; that he has been involved in this case falsely and that during investigation he was declared innocent by the local police as well as by Saeed Ahmad Khan, D.S.P. Bhalwal and that as a result of the investigation, name of the petitioner has been placed in column No. 2 of the challan.

5. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the D.S.P. had also come to the conclusion that only Umar Hayat co-accused of the petitioner had launched attack on the deceased and caused his death by firing a shot. Learned counsel submitted that the D.S.P. categorically noted in the case diaries that one of the shots fired by Umar Hayat co-accused had struck the deceased on his head while the other shots had gone a miss.

Lastly, learned counsel submitted that location of the entry wounds shown in the diagram prepared at the time of post-mortem examination, also shows that the entry wounds may be the result of one shot.

6. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the grant of bail and submitted that the opinion expressed by the police should not be acted upon in this case as the petitioner has been assigned the specific role of having caused an injury.

Learned counsel has not denied the factual side of the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was found innocent during investigation both by the local police as well as by the D.S.P. He has also not denied the fact that name of the petitioner has been placed in column No. 2 of the challan.

7. It will be too early to express opinion whether the deceased had suffered injuries as a result of two shots or the injuries were the result of one shot. Any expression at this stage might prejudice case of the prosecution, therefore, I am avoiding to say anything on that score.

The D.S.P. who had conducted the investigation, seems to have carried out the same thoroughly. He has also given the details as to how Umar Hayat co -accused of the petitioner had reached the place of occurrence and in what manner and circumstances he committed the offence.

This petition is allowed, keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has been declared innocent in two successive investigations. The D.S.P. who had conducted the investigation last, seems to have conducted a thorough investigation. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.twenty-five thousand with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Bhalwal.

H.B.T./Z-43/L

Bail granted.