MUHAMMAD SHARIF Versus THE STATE
ORDER
Muhammad Sharif petitioner has moved this petition for bail in a case registered against him and others under sections.148 and 302/149, P. P. C.
The brief facts of the case are that in September, 1982 Ismail and Ibrahim sons of Barkat Ali were murdered. Muhammad Hussain, Nazir Ahmad, Muhammad Siddiq, Nazir Hussain and Ashiq were challaned for their murder. All of them were on bail. The case was fixed in the Sessions Court on 13‑10‑1984. After attending the Court, Nazir Ahmad and Nazir Hussain were returning home in the company of Bashir Ahmad complainant, Ibrahim, Miraj Din and Muhammad Shafi. At about 4‑30 p.m. when they were on the Service Road, Muhammad Sharif petitioner armed with a gun and his co‑accused Muhammad Mushtaq, Muhammad Ishaq and Abdur Razzaq armed with carbines, Ibrahim son of Ilam Din, Ibrahim son of Alaf Din and Manna armed with hatchets emerged from a reed‑growth. Ibrahim son of Ilam Din raised a Lalkara that Nazir Ahmad and Nazir Hussain should not be spared, upon which Muhammad Mushtaq, Muhammad Ishaq and Abdur Razzaq fired one shot each at Nazir Hussain as a result of which he fell down. The petitioner fired a shot at Nazir Ahmad and he, too, fell down. Thereafter, Ibrahim caused hatchet blows to Nazir Ahmad and Nazir Hussain, and Manna accused gave hatchet blows to Nazir Hussain. Both the victims died at the spot.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated for the reason that he was a P.W. in the earlier double‑murder case. His main argument is that the petitioner has been found innocent during the investigation by the S.H.O. He submits that the injury attributed to the petitioner was simple in nature; the gun allegedly recovered at his instance was his own licensed one and the police planted it on him after getting it from an Arms Dealer with whom the petitioner had deposited it and that the empty allegedly recovered from the spot did not match with the said gun. He further submits that Ibrahim son of Alaf Khan and Abdur Rehman alias Manna were found innocent and Muhammad Shafi P.W. has made statement under section 164, Cr. P. C. that he had not seen the occurrence, therefore, the case of the petitioner needs further inquiry. The learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for bail.
3. I have gone through the relevant material. There is no substance in the contention that the petitioner was found innocent by the S.H.O. There is no such finding on the record. The other contentions raised by the learned counsel do not constitute any ground for the grant of bail. The petitioner is alleged to have fired his gun at Nazir Ahmad deceased. Post‑mortem report of Nazir Ahmad shows that he had three grazed fire‑arm wounds in an area of 8 c.m. x 6 c.m. in front of junction of abdomen and thorax. As many as five eye‑witnesses have implicated him in this case. In the circumstances, no ground for bail is made out. The petition is dismissed.
S. G. D. Bail declined.