MUHAMMAD AKRAM Versus STATE

ORDER

This order will dispose of bail petition Crl. Misc. No. 654/B/1981 filed by Muhammad Akram and Mustafa, petitioners, and bail petition Crl. Misc. No. ~a 678/B/1981 filed by Talib Hussain, petitioner.

2. The prosecution case is that on the night between 17/18-2-1981 one Allah Wasaya deceased was fired at and injured on the threshold of his house by persons who could not be identified, as his wife who was in one of the rooms inside, could not see any of the assailants, when she came out on hearing the hue and cry of her husband. Later, on extra-judicial confessions having been made by certain persons, a number of accused were hauled up and certain recoveries were effected at their instance. Muhammad Akram and Mustafa petitioners (in bail petition Crl. Misc. No. 654/B/1981) are alleged to have made extra judicial confessions on 19-3-1981 before Mr. Muhammad Ashiq and Ghulam Hussain admitting their participation in the occurrence with other co-accused and stating that Manzoor co-accused had fired at and mortally injured Allah Wasaya deceased. Talib Hussain (petitioner in bail petition Crl. No. 678/B/1981) is also alleged to have made a similar extra judicial confession before Muhammad Aslam and Ghulam Rasul Sindher. Talib Hussain petitioner is also alleged to have led to the recovery of a pistol.

3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the State and have perused the record in both the cases. The only item of evidence, which the prosecution has against Muhammad Akram and Mustafa, petitioners, is the extra-judicial confession alleged to have been made by them before Muhammad Ashiq and Ghulam Hussain. These two persons do not appear to be persons of any consequence and worth as would prompt the two petitioners to go to them to seek any assistance. In fact, according to the statement of these witnesses, they informed the petitioners that they could not assist them and it is yet to be seen, after evidence is recorded, as to whether they did go to these witnesses to seek any assistance and, if so, they made the extra-judicial confessions before them, as alleged. The same position obtained in respect of Talib Hussain, petitioner, as well. However the prosecution also has led evidence with regard to the recovery of a pistol a the instance of Talib Hussain petitioner, but the said pistol does not match with the empty recovered from the spot and none of the petitioners-adverted to Talib Hussain, petitioner, possessing any pistol during the occurrence in their extra judicial confessions. Taking all circumstances into consideration, the questions whether the petitioners did make extra judicial confessions, as alleged, and whether Talib Hussain, petitioner, did lead to the recovery of a pistol and, if so, its effect is incriminatory, are matters which call for further inquiry. In these circumstances, the petitioners have made out a case for bail.

4. For the foregoing reasons, both the bail petitions (Crl. Misc. No. 654/B/1981 and Crl. Misc. No. 678,/B/1981) are accepted and Muhammad Akram, Mustafa and Talib Hussain, petitioners, are admitted to bail in the sum of Rupees Thirty Thousand (Rs. 30,000) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Mailsi.

Bail granted.