' M. BILAL KHAN, J.-- Irfan alias Kalu son of Riaz Ahmad, the petitioner, by filing the instant petition seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,351, dated .27-4-2005, registered at Police Station Baghbanpura, Lahore for an offence under section 302/34, read with section 109, P.P.C. At the instance of Qaiser Meraj son of Mubarik Ali, brother of Imran Muntazir deceased.
2. Precisely the case of the prosecution as contained in the F.I.R. Was that the petitioner, armed with a chopper along with his co-accused, namely, Muhammad Ilyas alias Lasu, armed with a pistol, Muhammad Riaz, armed with Chhuri and Iftikhar Ahmad alias Kattu, armed with chopper caught hold of Imran Muntazir and started hurling abuses; thereafter, Muhammad Riaz inflicted a Chhuri blow on the right eye of Imran Muntazir, the petitioner then gave a chopper blow on his left eyebrow; Iftikhar caused a chopper blow cutting the throat of Imran Muntazir, who fell besmeared in blood; Muhammad Ilyas started firing with is pistol and one of the shots hit Mst. Sakina Bibi, who was standing nearby; thereafter Muhammad Riaz delivered her a Chhuri blow landing on her chin and then the petitioner gave her a chopper blow cutting her throat, who also fell soaked in blood; both the injured persons succumbed to their injuries instantaneously.
3. The petitioner had been arrested on 20-5-2005 and is in custody ever since. His plea for post- arrest bail had been turned down by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, vide order, dated 2-7-2005. Hence, the instant petition.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for both the sides at considerable length and have also gone through the record brought by Bashir Ahmad, A.S.-I.
5. It has been observed that the petitioner has been duly nominated in the promptly lodged F.I.R.
With a specific role of causing an injury on the eyebrow of Imran Muntazir deceased and the other fatal injury slashing the throat of Mst. Sakina Bibi deceased. The plea of alibi raised by the learned counsel does not carry any weight in the presence of the overwhelming prosecution evidence, wherein the complainants as well as the witnesses resolutely stick to their stance taken in the F.I.R.
As well as the statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. Medical evidence also supports the version of the prosecution. It is a case in which two innocent persons have lost their lives allegedly at the hands of the petitioner and his co-accused. The offence with which the petitioner has been charged attracts the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. There is ample material available against the petitioner prima facie connecting him with the crime imputed to him.
6. Resultantly, there being no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed.