MUHAMMAD WAQAS Versus State

ORDER

ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.--- Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No.144/2014, dated 27.09.2014 registered at Police Station Dhudial, District Chakwal in respect of offences under sections 302, 109, 34, P.P.C.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of this case with their able assistance. This is bail after arrest and only tentative assessment is allowed at this stage. After perusing the record of this case it has been noticed that the petitioner is not named in FIR. He was implicated in the instant case on the basis of statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. got recorded by Jahangir PW with the delay of three days after the incident. No explanation for this inordinate delay has been advanced by the prosecution, which prima facie reflects that implication of the petitioner in the instant case is the result of due deliberation and consultation. It is settled law that belated examination of witness by the police without furnishing any plausible explanation is fatal to the prosecution case and such statement of PW is not to be relied upon without any strong corroboration. Reliance can be placed upon 2010 SCMR 584. It has been further noticed that Shafqat Hussain co-accused, whose role is quite identical to that of the petitioner, has already been granted bail after arrest by this Court vide order dated 03.12.2015, therefore, the petitioner also deserves same treatment on the basis of rule of consistency. Reliance can be placed upon 2008 SCMR 249. The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and his trial has not completed so far. Investigation of the case to the extent of petitioner is complete, he is admittedly previous non-convict and his person is no more required by the police for further investigation, therefore, his continuous incarceration in jail would not serve any beneficial purpose at this stage. Mere heinousness of offence is no ground to refuse bail to an accused, who otherwise becomes entitled to this concession.

3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner is called for further inquiry into his guilt covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, accepted and the petitioner is allowed bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.500,000/- (Rupees five hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

4. The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and are only meant for the decision of bail petition.

HBT/M-80/L Bail granted.