1. Petitioner was non-suited for grant of bail in case F.I.R. No, 357 dated 4.8.2002 under Sections 302/34/148/149 PPG registered at Police Station Umarzai District Charsadda, has moved the instant bail petition.
2. 2.Facts in brief are that Alamzeb, complainant charged the petitioner alongwith his two sons, namely, Shakeel and Mansoor, Dr. Younas, his son Kamal Nasir, Masood Khan and Riaz Khan for effective firing at him, for the murder of his companion, namely, Zameer and ineffective firing at Khurshid and Mudassir, his companions.
3. 3.I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner who agitated the concession of bail on the sole ground of consistency as co-accused of the petitioner has already been allowed bail by the lower Court on 10.3,2003 which was not recalled by this Court through order dated 15.9.2003 and relied upon Inayatullah vs. The State (PLD 2003 Karachi 416).
4. 4.Learned counsel for the complainant opposed the concession of bail to the petitioner on the ground that case of the petitioner is distinguishable from his co-accused due to unexplained noticeable abscondence. Placed reliance on Ibrahim vs. Hayat Gul & others (1985 SCMR 382), Jan Muhammad vs. The State and another (1978 SCMR 287), Muhammad Imranullah Khan vs. The State (1995 Per.L.J. 167), Sardar vs. The State (PLD 1979 Peshawar 16). Learned DAG adopted the arguments of counsel for the complainant.
5. There are for and against judgments of this Court as well as the august Supreme Court of Pakistan for grant or refusal of bail for a fugitive of law keeping in view the facts and circumstances of each case. The case law cited at the bar need not be discussed in detailed due to distinguishable facts and circumstances of the case.
6. 5.The petitioner was well aware of the charge against him and he, opted not to surrender before the law for sufficient long time. The abscondence is deliberate and unexplained which make his case distinguishable from his co-accused. The motive behind the occurrence was intimated to be the political rivalry obviously between the petitioner on one hand and complainant on the other. It is available on record that petitioner and Alamzeb of the complainant party have got political rivalry. This fact cannot be denied that the petitioner got elected as MPA a number of time as candidate of ANP from the same constituency and also inducted in Provincial Cabinet, as Forest Minister wherefrom in the recent past election Alamzeb (whose brother Khurshid and his companions were fired at) was elected as M.P.A. as candidate of PPP. Petitioner and his co- accused except Dr. Younas were also subsequently charged under Section 302/324/148/149/427 PPC vide F.I.R. No, 36 dated 2.2.2003, (wherein Ayaz was done to death, Alamzeb MPA, Sajjad and Farmanullah sustained bullet injuries) which reflects upon gravity of motive between the parties.
7. Despite indiscriminate firing through lethal weapons life of Alamzeb, MPA was saved, however, he alongwith his three companions received bullet injuries and the vehicle damaged. Not only the unexplained prolong abscondence of the petitioner for which he was proceeded under Sections 87 and 204 of the Cr.P.C. but motive is also attributed to the petitioner which make his case distinguishable from the bailed out accused. It has been observed by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in a number of pronouncement that fugitive from law looses some of procedural and substantive rights. Tile learned Sessions Judge has elaborately discussed this aspect of the case duly, supported through case-law which need not be repeated to save the time and the petitioner was refused hail through a well reasoned detail order.
8. 6.Bail of the co-accused was not recalled by this Court vide order dated 15.9.2003 but the same is not useful for the petitioner not only on the ground that unexplained, deliberate prolong abscondence of the petitioner and a direct motive has distinguished his case from the co- accused but also on the ground that principles for the grant and cancellation of bail are altogether different. The petitioner is prima 'facie connected with the commission of offence and the learned counsel did not agitate the grant of bail on merits of the prosecution case but only agitated on the ground of consistency which is not. conceivable due to the aforementioned distinguishable features.
9. 7.In view of the above, I dismiss this bail petition, however, direct the trial Court to commence the trial of petitioner without any further delay and the trial be concluded within four months from the date of commencement of trial.