SHER BAZ Versus State

ORDER

MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.--- Rehmatullah, who was performing his duties as a Incharge of Police Check Post at Raikot submitted an application to SHO Goharabad and stated therein that on 04-11-2016 at 17:30 hours he received an information through a driver of Datsun that a dead body of a unknown person was lying in Thalichi Das. On reaching at the scene of occurrence, he found a dead body and on search CNIC divulged identity of the deceased as Inayatullah son of Taj resident of Kormang, Tehsil Alpuri, District Shangala. FIR No. 09/2016 dated 04-11-2016 under section 302, P.P.C. was registered against some unknown accused and investigation of the case started.

2. During investigation, the local Police arrested present petitioner, while co-accused Mustajib and Sher Alam were declared absconder. The accused/petitioner was arrested from Kohistan and brought to Diamar for the purpose of investigations.

3. The petitioner applied for bail in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge Diamar, which was refused vide order dated 05-04-2017 and being aggrieved from the order/judgment of learned trial Court, he has come to this Court for the concession of bail on multiple grounds, which does not find favour with the learned trial Court.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it was an unseen occurrence and there is no eye-witness of the occurrence. The petitioner/accused has been made a scapegoat just to fill in blank. His name is not reflected in the FIR. No motive has been mentioned in the FIR and moreover no recovery has been effected from the petitioner, which bring his case within the four corners of further inquiry.

5. On the other hand the learned Dy. Advocate General oppose the bail and submitted that the petitioner is prima facie linked with the commission of offence and it has been come on record that on the day of occurrence he and his co-accused Mustajib and Sher Alam travelled from Kohistan to Gilgit in the car of the deceased and after committing his murder they threw his dead body in Thalichi Das and made good their escape in the car of the deceased which was abundant near Jaglote as they could not convert it from gas to petrol. Per learned Dy. Advocate General they were traced after hectic efforts from the entries of the vehicle/persons travelling from down country to Gilgit-Baltistan. The learned Dy. Advocate General further stated that the I.O. of the case has collected call data record (CDR) pertaining to the petitioner and his co-accused. The learned Dy. Advocate General read out statement of PW Jan Muhammad son of Shereen Safa, resident of Dalnati, who stated that the petitioner and his co-accused stayed in Dalnati in the night on 04-11-2016 and thereafter they left for Gilgit. The claim of petitioner that he never visited Gilgit is belied from the statements of PW Jan Muhammad. The petitioner and his co-accused (absconding) Mustajib and Sher Alam booked the car of the deceased from Swat and I.O. recorded statements of PW Wahidullah and Daud, who both are from Swat and they implicates the petitioner as the car of deceased was booked from Swat by the petitioner in their presence.

6. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record with their able assistance.

7. As evident from the FIR, it was a blind murder and seems to have been committed after chalking out a plan and selection of a deserted place. The petitioner was traced from the information collected by the local Police from Chek Post located in different places of entry/exits of Diamar District. The accused was arrested from Kohistan and brought to Gilgit. The contention of the learned counsel that the present accused has not caused any injury to deceased does not hold the field, as a person who though does not cause any injury to deceased can be burdened with the constructive liability. Conditions set out in provision of law making out a prima facie case against him and it is famous saying that "men may tell lie but circumstances never tell lie" is attracted in the instant.

8. From the host of circumstances and circumstantial evidence, accused is prima facie linked with the commission of offence. The points raised at bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner could be well answered by the prosecution at the time of trial.

9. There is no merit in the petition, which is dismissed accordingly.

JK/160/GB Petition dismissed.