GHULAM ABBAS Versus THE STATE

ORDER

The petitioner stands burdened with the fatal fire-arm injury on the person of Saghir deceased through an F.I.R. bearing No.235, dated 4-7-1990 o Police Station Qila Didar Singh of District Gujranwala.

2. It is contended by the learned counsel that three of the co-accused the present petitioner, who were specifically nominated in the F.I.R. have sine been declared innocent and the prosecution case has thus become doubtful an open to further inquiry. Adds that after his arrest by the Investigating Office after the first remand which was obtained by him, the petitioner was never produced before any Court from 29-7-1990 to 30-6-1991 which made the detention of the petitioner, during that period, illegal and that this w sufficient ground to admit the petitioner to bail.

3. The mere fact that three of the petitioner's co-accused have since been declared innocent is no ground to hold that the case of the petitioner has also become one of further inquiry or to hold that the petitioner was not guilty of a non-bailable offence. This submission in fact reacts very strongly on the petitioner's case because if the I.O. was honest enough to declare three of the petitioner's co-accused persons innocent then there was nothing stopping him from giving a similar declaration in case of the petitioner if he was innocent as claimed. This is, therefore, no reason to release the petitioner on bail.

4. Even if it be conceded for the sake of arguments that the petitioner's detention from 29-7-1990 to 30-6-1991 was illegal then the same can hardly be a ground to release the petitioner on bail in July, 1992, when admittedly the present confinement of the petitioner in jail is under a valid warrant issued by the learned trial Court. This is, therefore, no ground either to admit the petitioner to bail.

5. In view of what has been noticed above, I find no merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed.

6. I am shocked to notice the contention of the learned counsel that the petitioner had been in judicial lock-up from 29-7-1990 to 30-6-1991 without any remand order having been passed by any competent Court/Magistrate.

7. The District Magistrate of Gujranwala is directed to inquire into this matter and if this fact be found correct then to initiate proper legal and departmental proceedings against the delinquent officials. Holding of this inquiry should not take the District Magistrate more than 15 days to conclude whereafter he shall submit a report to the registrar of this Court for the information of this Bench.

N.H.Q./G-87/L Bail refused.