This order will dispose of Crl. Misc. No. 8830-B/2006 filed by Mst. Huma Amjad and Crl. Misc. No. 9053-B/2006 filed by Mst. Azra Bibi seeking pre-arrest bail and post arrest bail respectively in case FIR No. 132/2006 dated 2.3.2006 for the offence under Sections 302/34 PPC registered at Police Station Batala Colony, Faisalabad.
2. Azra Bibi petitioner was arrested in this case on 12.9.2006 and her bail application was dismissed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Faisalabad vide order dated 2.11.2006.
3. The said case was got registered by Syed Sajjad Haider son of Syed Anwar Hussain with regard to the murder of his brother Syed Amjad Ali Shah who was done to death on 2.3.2006 at about 7.45 p.m. by some unknown persons when the deceased was going towards Mosque to offer prayer.
This occurrence took place within the area of Haseeb Shaheed Colony, near Mian Chowk situated about one and a half kilometer from Police Station Batala Colony, Faisalabad.
During the investigation on 30.7.2006 a supplementary statement made by complainant was brought on record stating therein that he had come to know that Huma Amjad petitioner who is the wife of his deceased's brother had illicit relations with one Ehsan and that she in connivance with her other co-accused including Azra Bibi planned for the murder of Syed Amjad Ali Shah and paid Rupees five lacs to Mst. Azra for engaging a hire assassin and ultimately Syed Amjad Ali Shah was done to death on 2.3.2006 when he was proceeding to say his prayers in the Mosque.
Record of this case reveals that 4nother supplementary statement of the complainant was brought on record on 15.8.2006 Stating therein that Mst. Azra Bibi petitioner had confessed before him that she (Mst. Azra Bibi) had friendly relations with Mst. Hurna Amjad (petitioner) who was not happy with her husband because he was not sexually strong and because of that she (Huma Amjad) had developed illicit relations with one Ehsan and now she intend to remove Syed Amjad Ali Shah, her husband from the picture. Thereafter she (Azra Bibi petitioner) alongwith Huma Amjad petitioner and other co-accused planned for the murder of Syed Amjad Ali Shah and Rupees five lacs were paid by Huma Amjad to her for doing the job. Statedly Azra Bibi petitioner also confessed that in furtherance of said conspiracy/planning on 25.2.2006 she paid Rupees five lacs alongwith photo of Syed Amjad Ali Shah to her, co-accused namely Shehzad who promised to accomplish the mission. Thereafter on 2.3.2006 Shehzad and Arshad being armed with .30 bore pistol while riding on a motorcycle way laid Syed Amjad Ali Shah near his house and committed his murder.
Allegedly the information about the presence of the deceased at the spot was conveyed to Azra petitioner by Huma Amjad petitioner on telephone.
Record of this case further reveals that on 1.8.2006 statement of Murtaza Hussain nephew of the deceased under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was also brought on record indicating that in his presence Rupees five lacs were paid to Mst. Azra Bibi petitioner by Huma Amjad petitioner on 25.2.2006 but since he was asked by the ladies to keep quite he did not disclose the same to anybody.
Another piece of evidence relied upon by the prosecution is the statements of Muhammad Iqbal and Amjad which were brought on record on 3:8.2006 stating therein that Mst. Azra Bibi petitioner used to give Taweez and they also used to visit her for the said purpose. Statedly, few days prior to the occurrence they had heard both the petitioners and their co-accused whispering behind the curtain about the commission of murder of Syed Amjad Ali Shah and that though they had come to know about the murder of Syed Amjad Ali Shah about 5/6 days after the occurrence but they did not disclose the said conspiracy to anybody and now their conscience has started pricking them, thus they got recorded their statements on 3.6.2006 i.e. after five months of the occurrence.
4. The bare perusal of the above data available on record reveals that there is no direct evidence against, both the petitioners to connect them with the commission of the offence and the entire case of prosecution against A the petitioners is in the form of circumstantial evidence i.e. extra- judicial confession of Azra Bibi petitioner and the evidence of conspiracy by the petitioners and their co-accused.
I have also observed that complainant of this case who is brother in law of Huma Amjad petitioner, prior to the registration of the case had filed three civil suits on behalf of the minor children of Huma Amjatl petitioner (off-spring of petitioner's marriage with Syed Amjad Ali Shah deceased) i.e. suit for declaration restraining Huma petitioner from selling the house of B her degeased husband, suit for declaration that Huma Amjad is entitled only for her share out of her husband property/money Rs. 25,00,000/- payable to the family of the deceased by Habib Bank Limited and the suit for permanent injunction restraining Habib Bank Limited where deceased was employed to release the dues of deceased in favour of Huma Amjad petitioner (widow of Syed Amjad Ali Shah deceased).
I have observed that in the said civil suits the complainant never took the plea that Syed Amjad Ali Shah was murdered by his wife namely Hum Amjad (petitioner). The said litigation clearly show that the relations of the parties were strained and thus the involvement of Huma Amjad petitioner in this criminal case after the lapse of about five months upon the supplementary statement of the complainant itself is sufficient to show the mala fide of the complainant party.
'Prima facie the said facts of the case are sufficient to open the doors of further inquiry qua the involvement of both the petitioners entitling them to the concession of bail. Both the petitioners are female and their case is also covered under Ist proviso to Section 497(1) Cr.P.C. Accordingly, both these petitions (Crl. Misc. No. 8830-B/2006 and Crl. Misc. 9053-B/2006) are allowed and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to Huma Amjad vide order dated 1.11.2006 stands confirmed against the same surety. Similarly, Mst. Azra Bibi petitioner is admitted to bail subject to her furnishing bails bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like