' Through this petition Muhammad Ashiq petitioner-complainant has called in question the order dated 25-3-2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kasur whereby respondent No.1 was admitted to pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.405 registered at Police Station City A Division, Kasur on 23-9-2003 for offences under sections 302/147/ 148/201/109, P.P.C. On 7-4-2004 notice of this petition had been issued by this Court to respondent No.1 whereas this petition had been dismissed to the extent of respondents Nos.2 to 4.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of this case with their assistance it has straightaway been observed that the F.I.R. In this case had been lodged with a delay of four months and eleven days. A perusal of the F.I.R. Shows that the alleged murder had remained unwitnessed. Although the dead body of Mst. Firdaus Begum deceased had been disinterred and subjected to postmortem examination yet it is admitted at all hands that no opinion was given by the relevant doctor regarding the cause of the deceased's death as it was not possible at that stage. It is thus, quite obvious that the medical evidence does not show in this case as to whether the deceased had died an unnatural death or not. There is no other evidence available on the record qua culpability of respondent No.1 except an extra-judicial confession allegedly made by Khushi Muhammad co-accused, the father-in-law of a sister of respondent No.1, wherein he had allegedly roped in respondent No.1 and many other members of the family but that extrajudicial confession of Khushi Muhammad was statedly made by him before some witnesses on 25-6-2003 whereas the witnesses before whom such confession had been made had made their statements under section 161 Cr.P.C. On 28-9-2003, i.e. More than three months after the making of the extra-judicial confession by the said Khushi Muhammad. It is ironical to note that the only link available on the record between respondent No.1 and the alleged offences was Khushi Muhammad co-accused but the said Khushi Muhammad co-accused has already been exonerated during the investigation and he has not been made an accused person in the challan.
The record of investigation shows that the first Investigating Officer of this case had recommended discharge of respondent No.1 and his co-accused whereas the investigation of this case was subsequently conducted by the Superintendent of Police, Investigation, Kasur who had opined about guilt of respondent No.1 and others. The record of investigation, however, shows that the Superintendent of Police, Investigation, Kasur I ad not recorded statement of any witness and had failed to record even any case-diary in respect of his investigation and he had remained contented with preparing a report containing his opinion about guilt of respondent No.1 and others.
It, thus, appears that the Superintendent of Police, investigation, Kasur had arrogated to himself the role of adjudication rather than investigation and without collecting any 'evidence on his own he had only rendered an opinion regarding guilt of the accused party. The Superintendent of Police, Investigation, Kasur shall be well-advised to go through the provisions of section 4(1), Cr.P.C. So as to correctly appreciate the role of an Investigating Officer. It goes without saying that an opinion recorded by an Investigating Officer regarding guilt or innocence of an accused person is inadmissible in evidence.
' It may be relevant to mention here that the main emphasis laid by the learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court today is on a document dated 7-7-2003 which purportedly is an agreement of compromise and is based upon an assertion of Muhammad Ashiq complainant wherein respondent No.1 and other members of the accused party have been shown as marginal witnesses. The learned counsel for the petitioner has branded the said document as a written confession by respondent No.1 and others. The contents of the said document prima facie show that through the said document Muhammad Ashiq complainant has forgiven the accused party and respondent No.1 and others have been shown in the said document as marginal witnesses. In that document Muhammad Ashiq complainant. Has described the death of his daughter namely Mst. Firdaus Begum as "accidental". Without commenting any further on the said document it may be sufficient to observe that the said document has already been made a subject-matter of a civil suit whereby the accused party is seeking cancellation of the said document. The said civil suit is already sub judice before a learned Civil Court and I would, therefore, refrain from commenting any further on the said document.
It is admitted at all hands that after completion of investigation a challan has already been submitted before the learned trial Court and that during the investigation respondent No.1 had joined the investigation and nothing had been recovered from his custody. The entire record of investigation shows that no specific allegation of any nature had ever been levelled by the prosecution against respondent No.1 and the allegations levelled by the complainant party have throughout been couched in generalized and vague terms. In the above mentioned backdrop of the facts of this case a possibility regarding false implication of respondent No.1 could not safely be ruled out of consideration at this stage.
' For what has been discussed above no occasion has been found by. This Court for cancelling respondent No. 1's bail at such a stage and this petition is, therefore, dismissed.
6. Before parting with this order it may be clarified that the observations made in the present order shall always be treated as tentative in nature and the same shall not prejudice the learned trial Court of this criminal case or even the learned civil Court seized of the above mentioned civil suit in any manner whatsoever.