ABDUL HAMEED Versus STATE

ORDER

A case under section 302/109, P.P.C. is registered against the petitioner and his brother Ghulam Abbas alias Sindhi for an occurrence, which took place on 14-8-1998 at about 6-00 p.m. in which Ghulam Haider a brother of the complainant was done to death.

2. It is submitted that principal accused in this case is alleged to be Ghulam Abbas alias Sindhi, brother of the present petitioner, who according to the F.I.R. fired at the deceased with his rifle which proved fatal. However, the name of the petitioner was mentioned in the F.I.R. on the ground that the murder was done by the principal accused on his instigation.

3. The bail is opposed on the ground that the main accused has since absconded and is not so far arrested although the challan has been sent to the Court for trial. It is further submitted that the petitioner is linked with the occurrence as he had conspired with the principal accused to murder the deceased. In this respect reference was made to the statement of Falak Sher and Muhammad Ramzan P.Ws. recorded on 10-9-1998 in which both of them contended that they had heard the petitioner talking to his brother Ghulam Abbas i.e. absconding accused hatching a conspiracy to kill the deceased. In pursuance of that conspiracy the principal accused Ghulam Abbas allegedly fatally fired at the deceased on the next following day.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that names of the aforesaid witnesses are not mentioned in the F.I.R. and that their statements have been allegedly concocted after about one month of the occurrence. It was the result of due deliberations on the part of complainant's side in qrder to rope the petitioner falsely in this case.

5. I have considered the foregoing facts and have also gone through the record. Even according to the F.I.R., the petitioner was not present when the principal accused had fired at the deceased, which proved fatal. The names of the witnesses relating to conspiracy were not mentioned in the F.I.R. itself nor it was explained as to how and where the conspiracy had taken place. The evidentiary value of witnesses of conspiracy can be taken into consideration at the time of trial. The deeper appreciation of the merit of the case cannot be undertaken at this stage lest it may prejudice the trial altogether.

6. In view of the foregoing facts, it has become a case of further inquiry. Accordingly this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

Q.M.H./M.A.K./M-980/L Bail allowed.