SHERAZ AHMAD Versus THE STATE

ORDER

Shiraz Ahmad petitioner seeks bail in a case registered against him and others with Police Station Phularwan, District Sargodha, vide F.I.R. No.10/95, dated 28-1-1995 for an offence under section 302, P.P.C. Case was got registered by Muhammad Akram with the allegation that on 28-1-1995 he learnt that the dead body of an unknown person was lying in his field of sugarcane and reported the matter. During the investigation the petitioner was apprehended.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it is a case of no evidence in so far as ocular account is concerned nor circumstantial evidence is available. There is extra-judicial confession allegedly made by the petitioner before Tanveer and Ramzan P.Ws., that also after three months of the occurrence. Submits that no reliance on the said statement can be placed. The petition has been controverted by learned counsel for the State.

3. 1 have heard the learned counsel at length. The only evidence available against the petitioner is of extra judicial confession, which he allegedly made on 14-4-1995 when the occurrence took place on 28-1-1995. A close examination of the statement of both the witnesses deposing about extra-judicial confession reveals that basically it was made by the father of the petitioner. The petitioner is only alleged to have confirmed the statement of his father, which prima facie cannot be taken as a confessional statement. Apart from the above evidence, there is nothing, which could connect the petitioner with the alleged occurrence even remotely. In these circumstances, it becomes a case of further inquiry. Therefore, the petitioner is allowed bail, provided he furnishes security in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Sargodha.

N.H.Q./S-468/L Bail allowed.