' SAIF-UR-REHMAN, J.---Petitioners have moved this petition for their release on bail in case F.I.R.
No.561, dated 23-10-2006 under sections 302/148/149, P.P.C. Police Station Gaggo, District Vehari.
2. It is alleged that on abetment of Mukhtar Ahmad Qadri and Tariq Mahmood petitioners, their co- accused who were armed with fire weapons committed the Qatl-i-Amad of Muhammad Hayat husband of the complainant.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners 'submitted that petitioners were not named in the F.I.R. They were named subsequent to the registration of the case by the complainant through her supplementary statement by mentioning facts not consistent to the story in the F.I.R. Nothing was recovered from them. No overt act was assigned to them. It, therefore, was a case of further inquiry.
The petitioners, therefore, were entitled to bail.
4A. Opposing the petition learned DPG assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant submitted that the complainant was an illiterate lady. Mukhtar Ahmad Qadri petitioner No.1 was the main character who was mainly instrumental in the commission of murder of Muhammad Hayat. It was he who obtained thumb impressions of the complainant on blank paper on the pretext of receiving dead body of the deceased from mortuary and the story as contained in the F.I.R. Was manoeuvred. He, therefore, was the principal accused who had engineered the crime. His co- petitioner Tariq Mahmood had also similar role. Muhammad Hussain and Ghulam Rasool were still absconding. Sufficient material existed on record to believe that the petitioners were involved in the occurrence. Hence, they were not entitled to bail.
5. The petitioners admittedly are not named in the F.I.R., their names appeared on the scene, as having a hand in the commission of the occurrence, during supplementary statement of the complainant. The fact as to whether the explanation given by the complainant in connection with omission of names of the petitioners in the F.I.R. And as to whether they had really abetted their co- accused to commit the murder shall be A determined after recording of evidence.
6. This is found to be a case of further inquiry to the extent of the petitioners who are allowed bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.