' MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J.---That a case under section 17(4) of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979) was registered against the accused/petitioner on the report of one Gohar Khan A.S.-I. Of Police Station, Tarnab, Peshawar vide F.I.R. No,249 dated 31-8-2009. The contents of the F.I.R. Reflect that the complainant while on his routine duty, received an information about a dead body lying in the fields of one Niaz Ali Khan and on this information he rushed to the spot and recovered the dead body who was done to death through a firearm and a case under section 302, P.P.C. Was initially registered against the unknown accused. The present accused/ petitioners were later on charged by the brother of the deceased namely Muhammad Parvez and his driver Khalid Zaman in their statements recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. For the murder of the deceased and snatching the car of the deceased and section of law was altered to section 17 of the Offences against Property (Enforcement of Hudood)
Ordinance (VI of 1979).
2. Learned counsel for the accused/ petitioners and Mr. Gul Daraz Khan, Advocate for the State assisted by Shahibzada Bahauddin, Advocate for the complainant were heard and the record of the case was perused.
3. Record of the case reveals that it was an unseen occurrence and there was no material evidence connecting the accused/ petitioners with the commission of offence except the statement of the brother of deceased namely Parvez Khan and driver of the deceased recorded under section 164, A Cr.P.C. At a belated stage. The recovery of the car of the deceased was also made on the information provided by the informer and that too not from the accused/ petitioners.
The alleged motive is against the absconding accused. Nothing material was recovered from or at the instance of accused/petitioners. So, in the circumstances of the case, there is nothing on the record which could prima facie connect the accused with the commission of offence which makes the case of the accused/petitioners as that of further inquiry entitling them for the release on bail under section 497(2), Cr.P.C.
4. With the observations made above, this petition is accepted and the petitioners are allowed bail provided each one of them furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs,100,000 (one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate.
5. These are the reasons for the short order announced earlier. However, the observations recorded above being tentative in nature, may not prejudice the mind of the trial Court.