' IQBAL HAMEEDUR REHMAN, J.--- Through this petition, the petitioner seeks bail in case F.I.R. No,382 dated 29-8-2008 registered at Police Station Narang Mandi District Sheikhupura, under sections 302 and 34, P.P.C.
2. According to the F.I.R., the allegation against the petitioner is that on 29-8-2008, he along with co-accused came on the motorbike in front of house of the complainant and knocked at the door and took Ali Raza with them. When Ali Raza did not return home, the complainant along with P.Ws.
Went in search of him and they saw that the petitioner and his co-accused Ihsan-ul-Haq have strangulated Ali Raza with Parna and were saying that he be taught a lesson for. Abusing. On seeing the P.Ws., the accused fled away and Ali Raza died at the spot.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence and that Ali Raza and the petitioner were best friends and on 14=8-2008, Ali Raza purchased a motorcycle on the guarantee of the petitioner and the petitioner also provided Rs,500 to Ali Raza for the payment of instalment; that on the day of occurrence, the petitioner along with Aslam son of Munir Ahmad, Abbas son of Muhammad Boota and Nadeem were standing at the bus stop Ahdian and they met Ali Raza and the petitioner demanded Rs,500 and on this an altercation took place between them and Ali Raza gave, fist blow to the petitioner and in retaliation the petitioner also gave fist blows to him and Ali Raza fell on the bricks and got injured and the petitioner immediately got a Charpai for the deceased and called Muhammad Rafique and above factum of the occurrence has been accepted by the first Investigating Officer Khadim Hussain as well as second Investigating Officer Zafarullah Khan, as such, the allegation as set out in the F.I.R. Of the occurrence is not true and it is also not corroborated by the post-mortem report as no Parna is stated to have been recovered with the dead body. It is further stated that the petitioner remained on physical remand for 14 days but nothing was recovered from his possession. Further contended that the petitioner was less than 18 years of age at the time of alleged occurrence, meaning thereby that he was juvenile within the meaning of section 2(b) of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 and in this behalf, he has placed reliance on B-Form birth certificate attached with this petition. Further stated that opinion of two Investigating Officers is against the prosecution version, which makes the case against the petitioner one of further inquiry; that the witnesses of the occurrence in their statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. Did not corroborate the version of the complainant as set out in the F.I.R. Which renders the prosecution case doubtful; that there are material contradictions in between ocular account of the complainant, prosecution witnesses and medical evidence, as according to the prosecution witnesses there was Parna round the neck of the deceased Ali Raza but as per post-mortem report, there was no Parna round the neck of the deceased; that the site-plan prepared by the Investigating Officer contradicts the site-plan with the site-plan prepared by the Draftsma n and this fact shows that the presence of the complainant and witnesses at the spot, is doubtful and that the petitioner was arrested on 10-9-2008 and since then, he is behind the bars and he is not required for further investigation.
4. On the other hand, the learned A.D.P.P. Has vehemently opposed the bail application and states that the commission of offence has not been denied by the petitioner; that the petitioner has committed a heinous offence; that the case of the prosecution is duly supported by the P.Ws., Tahir Mehmood and Javed Iqbal, who saw the petitioner along with co-accused strangulating the deceased and there is no contradiction between the ocular account of the complainant and the prosecution witnesses; that the F.I.R. Was lodged within a period of two hours of the murder; that post-mortem report also supports the prosecution as death of the deceased was caused by strangulation and that when the dead body was recovered, Parna was around the neck of the deceased and further the challan has been submitted on 30-9-2008.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.D.P.P. And have also perused the record.
6. The petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. According to the P.Ws., Tahir Mehmood and Javed Iqbal, they saw the petitioner along with accused strangulating the deceased. Medical report also supports the prosecution that the cause of the death of the deceased is stated to be by strangulation. The motive also supports the prosecution version as the petitioner demanded Rs,500 from the deceased Ali Raza but he refused to pay, as a result thereof, an altercation took place, which is admitted by the petitioner. The petitioner has also been found guilty during the investigation. Challan has been submitted on 30-9-2008. Moreover, the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner go into a deeper appreciation of evidence, which cannot be taken into consideration at this stage and only tentative evidence is to be taken into consideration. There is sufficient material available on the record to support the prosecution version and at this stage granting bail to the petitioner on the ground of juvenility, as urged in the petition, is also not justified and when the petitioner has committed such an offence, which is a heinous, gruesome, brutal, sensational in character or shocking to public morality, by strangulating a person stated to be his best friend on a petty dispute over the recovery of Rs,500, he does not deserve the concession of the grant of bail on the mere legal ground of juvenility keeping in view the proviso to subsection (7) of section 10 of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000.
7. In view of the above circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.
Resultantly, this petition is dismissed.