HAJI MIAN SOHAN AND ANOTHER Versus THE STATE
ORDER
This is an application for grant of bail to Haji Mian Sohan and Channan Din petitioners in case under section 302/307/148/149, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Saddar Sheikhupura vide F.I.R. No. 435 of 1987 dated 13-7-1987.
2. The prosecution case is that on the night between 12/13-7-1987 Akhtar Ali complainant Zaheer-ud-Din deceased, Maqsood Ahmad and Ghulam Rasool P.Ws. were sleeping in the house of the deceased when three co-accused namely Ameen, Naeem and Munir after having scaled over the wall entered the house. They were carrying fire-arms. Muhammad Ameen fired shots from his carbine on the chest of the deceased who fell down and succumbed to the injuries. Munir fired in the air whereas Naeem caused injuries with the butt of his gun on the head of Maqsood Ahmad P.W. Thereafter, the three co-accused went out of the house. As far the petitioners it has been alleged that after the occurrence when the complainant and other P.Ws. came out of the house, the petitioners fired ineffective shots on them.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had not caused any injury to the deceased; that they had not even gone into the house where Zaheer-ud-Din was murdered and Maqsood was injured; that there are allegations of ineffective firing on the P.Ws. that Haji Mian Sohan is 75 years of age; that Channan Din is 70 years of age and they have been involved falsely in the case. Learned counsel for the State has opposed this application on the ground that Haji Mian Sohan had a strong motive to kill the deceased inasmuch as the latter was a witness against the former in two criminal cases; that Zaheer-ud-Din was also pursuing a civil suit filed against Haji Mian Sohan petitioner; that the petitioners are vicariously liable for the murder of Zaheer-ud-Din and injuries to Maqsood Ahmad in that they remained present outside the house where Zaheer-ud-Din was killed and also fired ineffective shots on the witnesses and that the case has been fixed for hearing in the month of February, 1988.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find that the petitioners did not cause any injury to the deceased; that they did not enter the house where Zaheer-ud-Din was killed and Maqsood Ahmad received injuries; that there is no evidence that they had come alongwith co-accused who had scaled over the wall of the house of the deceased that the petitioners did not cause any injury to the P.Ws; that as stated by the Investigating Officer, Haji Mian Sohan is above 75 years and Channan Din is 70 years in age. For all these reasons, I am of the view that a case for grant of bail to the petitioners has been made out. That being the position, I feel that the bail should not be withheld on the ground that the case has been fixed for hearing in the month of February 1988. If on merit an accused person is entitled to bail, there would be no justification to keep him in jail even for a moment.
For what has been said above, the petitioners are allowed bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C. /Duty Magistrate, Sheikhupura.
M.Y.H. /S-155/L Bail granted.