NAEEM ULLAH Versus State

ORDER

ALI BAIG, J. ---Through the instant petition filed under section 498, Cr.P.C. read with section 21-D of A.T.A., 1997, the petitioners/accused seek pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.114/2019, registered under sections 302/34, P.P.C. and sections 6/7, A.T.A. at Police Station Jutial, Gilgit.

2. Briefly prosecution story as disclosed in the FIR is that, brother of complainant deceased Muhammad Ghayas was prayer Leader (Pesh-e-Imam) of Masjid AL-Murtaza Diamer Colony Jutial, Gilgit. On 13.09.2019 at about 20:00 hours, the deceased was offering prayer along with other people in the said Masque. In the meanwhile, one unknown person opened fire upon the deceased, which hit on the head of the deceased and he expired on the spot. The complainant has expressed suspicion that there is possibility that the present petitioners/accused have committed murder of his deceased brother.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners/ accused contended that the petitioners are innocent and complainant and police have falsely implicated the petitioners in this case with mala fide intention and ulterior motives to humiliate the petitioners in the society. The learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that many people were present in the Masque at the time of occurrence, but they have not seen the present petitioners at the place of occurrence. The learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that wife of the deceased namely Mst. Atia has nominated one Rehmat Din son of Baz Khan resident of Hudoor Chilas, in her statement recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. who has absconded, hence case of the petitioners requires further inquiry and the petitioners are entitled for concession of bail.

4. On the other hand the learned counsel for the complainant and Dy. Advocate General vehemently opposed this petition by contending that although the complainant has not directly charged the petitioners in the FIR, but he has expressed suspicion that the petitioners might have murdered the deceased. The learned counsel for the complainant and Dy. A.G. further argued that the wife of deceased Mst. Atia has stated in her statement recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C., that she has seen the petitioners while escaping from the place of occurrence along with principal accused Rehmat Din son of Baz Khan, thus, petitioners are prima facie connected with the alleged offence, and therefore, they are not entitled for concession of pre-arrest bail.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance.

6. From perusal of contents of FIR it reveals, that one unknown person had allegedly opened fire on the deceased, while he was offering Asha prayer in Al-Murtaza Masque Jutial, Gilgit. However, the complainant has expressed suspicion that the present petitioners might have murdered the deceased as it was allegation against the step brother of deceased namely Raza Ullah that he had illicit relations with the sister of present petitioners namely Naeem Ullah and Naseem Ullah, but widow of deceased and son of deceased in their statements recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. by the Police have stated, that one Rehmat Din has opened fire shot on the deceased as they have seen the above named person at the door of Al-Murtaza Masque holding a Pistol in his hand soon after the occurrence.

7. Moreover, except the suspicion of complainant party, the Investigating Officer (I.O.) has failed to collect any direct evidence showing involvement of petitioners in the commission of alleged crime. In absence of any direct evidence against the petitioners, it cannot be said that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioners are guilty of abetment in the commission of murder of the deceased, hence the matter requires further inquiry as contemplated by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. and the petitioners are entitled for concession of pre-arrest bail.

8. For what has been discussed above, we are inclined to allow this petition. Consequently, ad-interim pre-arrest bail granted by this court in favour of the present petitioners on 29-10-2019, is confirmed subject to their furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.500,000/- (five lacs) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court/any Judicial Magistrate at Gilgit. File.

SA/187/GB Bail confirmed.