Faiz Muhammad son of Fazal petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No, 133/08 dated (not mentioned in the body of the petition and according to photo copy of FIR and other material available on the record is 17.5.2008) for offences under Sections 302/201/34 PPC registered at Police Station Choti District Dera Ghazi Khan.
2. It is inter-alia contended that petitioner is neither named in the FIR nor identification parade has been held; that there is unexplained delay of about 22 days in lodging the FIR; that nothing has been recovered either from the petitioner or on his pointation and so called recoveries have been planted upon him; that he is in the judicial lock up for the last about one year and no more required for investigation purpose; that although challan has been submitted yet the conclusion of the trial is not insight in future; that there is no substantial evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged occurrence; that it is witnessed occurrence and lastly prays for grant of bail.
3. Conversely, learned Deputy Prosecutor General assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposes this petition and submits that on the same day few hours after registration of the FIR, in supplementary statement of the complainant, the petitioner was implicated in the case. The role attributed to the petitioner in the supplementary statement is that he caught hold of the deceased and facilitated the principle accused Nabi Bakhsh real son of the petitioner who caused murder of the deceased Muhammad Farooq aged about 18/19 years; that during the course of investigation he has been found guilty and that he is the man who burried the dead body secretly, which was recovered on his pointation and the Kassi statedly used for digging out the grave was also recovered; that wrist watch of the deceased was also recovered from the petitioner and that he also pointed out the place of occurrence and that statements of two formal witnesses have also been recorded.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. Admittedly there is an unexplained delay of 22 days in lodging the FIR, wherein, he was not named. The involvement of the petitioner on the same day upon a supplementary statement of the complainant atleast prima facie does not appeal to reasoning and seems to be improbable.
The role attributed to the petitioner even in the supplementary statement is that of facilitating commission of the murder by catching hold of the deceased. He is behind the bars for the last more than one year. His son has been shown as principle accused in the case in hand. False implication of the petitioner on account of his relationship with the principal accused cannot be ruled out. Furthermore, the question of vicarious liability can only be determined during the course of trial and that too after recording the prosecution evidence.
6. In view of the above I am therefore of the considered view that petitioner has made out a case of further inquiry within the parameters of Section 497 Cr.P.C. This petition is allowed. I admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000/- (Two lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.