NASIR HUSSAIN Versus STATE

ORDER

For the murder of Sabir, the petitioner was arrested on 30‑7‑1988. ' T he petitioner was named as an eye‑witness in the F.I.R.; he was not named as an accused. The incident occurred at 8‑00 or 9‑00 a.m. on 25‑8‑1986 and was reported by Walayat Khan, complainant, at 11‑00 a.m. on the same day. The prosecution case is that Mst. Naseem Akhtar was married to one Muhammad Ashraf, who had divorced her. After her divorce, the complainant, Walayat Khan, had married her. There was some land in the name of Mst. Naseem Akhtar and her brothers had a case of abduction registered against the complainant. They wanted Mst. Naseem Akhtar to be returned to them and as the complainant did not do so, there had been two other incidents before this one. According to the F.I.R. on the day of the incident, the complainant accompanied by Amjad Farooq, Naveed Akhtar, Muhammad Ashraf (petitioner) and Sabir deceased, who was a servant of the complainant, went to the house of one Rehmdad. They sat in the Chaubara of Rehmdad for some time. When they left the Chaubara, the accused persons named in the F.I.R., 8 in number, fired shots at the complainant party. They went into the Chaubara. Sabir deceased peeped through a window and he was hit by a shot Fired by Muhammad Naeem alias Nannah accused.

2. It appears that Ghulam Haider, father of Sabir' deceased, made a statement before police saying that Naveed Akhtar, Amjad Farooq and Muhammad Ashraf, who as has been seen above, were mentioned as the companions of Walayat Khan, complainant, were also armed with guns; according to him, it was the shot of Naveed Akhtar accused which had hit Sabir. In that statement, Ghulam Haider further said that Amjad Farooq and Muhammad Ashraf, petitioner, had caused injuries to the deceased with the butts of their guns.

3. It appears, however, that Ghulam Haider was not a witness to the incident.

4. The petitioner was, as has been noted above, arrested on 30‑7‑1988. It appears, however, that earlier in April, 1987, he had been arrested in a case under section 307 of the P.P.C. The accused persons, Amjad Farooq and Naveed Akhtar, have not yet been arrested. The other accused persons, whose names occurred in the F.I.R., were tried and acquitted. It also appears that Walayat Khan, complainant, had throughout stuck to his version in the F.I.R., namely, that it was the accused persons mentioned in the F.I.R. who had fired shots. In the circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner's case falls under section 497, subsection (2) of the Cr.P.C. I, therefore, allow the petitioner to be released on bail on his furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.30,000 (Rupees thirty thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

S.A./M‑1473/L Bail granted.