MUHAMMAD KHOKHAN alias RAFIQ alias KHOKHA and another vs THE STATE

ORDER

1. ' I would propose to decided the Bail Applications Nos.1055 and 1056 of 2001 by a single order as the same arise out of the same bail order.

2. ' Accused Karim alias Shahabuddin and Muhammad Khokhan are booked in F.I.R. No,113 of 2000, under section 302/34, P.P.C. Of Police Station Ibrahim Hyderi.

3. ' The brief facts of the case are that on 15-10-2000, at about 9-30 p.m. Inspector S.H.O. Ghulam Asghar Khan of Police Station Ibrahim Hyderi was conveyed a message on wireless by A.S.-I.

4. Muhammad Nawaz, who was said to be on mobile duty at that time, informing him that a dead body of an unknown person was lying near western wall of Naval, on the road side. The incident seems to have taken place about an hour back. The A.S.-I. Further informed him that he was present at the site.

5. ' The complainant alongwith A.S.-I. Anwar Zaib Swatee proceeded to the place of incident. The report under section 174, Cr.P.C. Was initiated and the dead body was sent for post-mortem. The F.I.R. Further reveals that deceased had sustained bullet injuries on its occipital region and near his left elbow. The dead body was lying in mortuary at Edhi Centre for 3 days. The S.H.O. Recorded such F.I.R. On 16-10-2000 at 6-00 hours and commenced investigation in the matter. During investigation, the police arrested accused Abdul Rab alias Munna on 6-1-2001, who is said to have confessed his guilt before P.W. Muhammad Arif Khan and A.S.-J. Anwar Zaib. Accused Abdul Rab alias Munna further stated that the present applicants were alongwith him when he committed murder of deceased ' It is contended by learned counsel that the incident was unwitnessed. The names of applicants/accused do not figure in the F.I.R. There is no ocular evidence against the accused.

6. Except the extra-judicial confession said to have been made before the private person and A.S.-I., there is no other piece of evidence connecting the applicants/accused with the commission of the offence. The F.I.R. Is delayed and nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the present applicants/accused. It is stated by the learned counsel appearin for applicant Karim alias Shahabuddin that the present applicant was in_ jail two months prior to the commission of the offence. Learned counsel has submitted remand order which indicates that the applicant was arrested on 15-8-2000 in some other cases.

7. ' Mr. Imdad Hussain Kazi learned counsel appearing for the State, in the above stated circumstances has conceded to the bail plea of accused.

8. The perusal of record shows that the names of applicant do not figure in the F.I.R. The incident is unwitnessed. The F.I.R. Was recorded after the dead body was discovered by the police. The applicants/accused were arrested on the basis of statement made before the police by accused Abdul Rab alias Munna. He too has not taken the name of accused Karim and Shahabuddin. The remand order has been produced on record which shows that accused Karim alias Shahabuddin was arrested on 15-8-2000 in some other crime. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of present applicants. The police has not collected any evidence against the accused except the extra-judicial confession of co-accused Abdul Rab. Learned counsel appearing for State has also conceded to the bail'plea of accused. At present, there appear no 'reasonable grounds to believe that the applicants are guilty of the offence falling under prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Their case needs further enquiry as contemplated by section 497(2), Cr.P.C.

9. ' They are granted bail, subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac only) each and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.