SHOUKAT HUSSAIN vs THE STATE

ORDER

' Shoukat Hussain, the petitioner through the instant petition has sought for post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,250 dated 30-5-2002 under sections 302/109/34, P.P.C. Registered with Police Station Sadar, Vehari.

2. Briefly the prosecution case as per F.I.R. Is that on 26-5-2002 at 7-00 p.m. Nadeem armed with (dagger) Zawar and Shaukat in furtherance of their common intention had committed the Qatl-i- Amd of deceased Javed due to illicit liaison between him and their sister. It was at the instance of their father Muhammad Amir.

3. He (petitioner) is alleged to have held the deceased in clasp while Nadeem inflicted dagger blow to him hitting his left temporal region, who fell down and died subsequently.

4. It has been contended on his behalf that he has falsely been roped in; that whole of his family have been involved in this case due to enmity; that no injury to the deceased has been attributed to him; that during the investigation, he, his brother Zawar and father. Muhammad Amir were found innocent as no solid evidence was collected against them by the police; that their names were placed in Column No,2 of the challan report and they were left to the mercy of the Court and hence, the case against him certainly needs further inquiry into his guilt and the same is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. And that he is behind the bars and previous non- convict. In support of bail plea reliance has been placed upon the case of Ali Shah v. The State (2002 PCr.LJ 707 Karachi) and Mehmood Akhtar and another v. Haji Nazir Ahmad and 4 others (1995 SCM R 310).

5. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel assisted by the counsel for the complainant has opposed the petition on the ground that he is named in the F.I.R.; that he caught hold of Javed Iqbal deceased in clasp and so he has allegedly played an active role in the occurrence by facilitating his co-accused in the commission of the Qatl-i-Amd of the deceased.

6. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with the help of available record.

7. The fact remains that mere the role of holding the deceased in his Japha is attributed to him.

8. Admittedly he has been found innocent during the investigation as no solid evidence was collected against him by the police and his name was placed in Column No,2 of the challan report.

All these facts essentially render his case as further inquiry into his guilt and the same is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. In this regard reliance is placed upon the case of Ali Shah v. The State (2002 PCr.LJ 707 Karachi) and Mehmood Akhtar and another v. Haji Nazir Ahmad and 4 others (1995 SCM R 310). He is behind the bars and stated to be previous non-convict and his trial as yet has not commenced.

9. In these circumstances, .The petition, therefore, is accepted and he is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.