1. ' ABDUL HADI KHOSO, J.---The facts of the case are that the statement of complainant Fazal Muhammad was converted under section 154, Cr.P.C. In which he stated that marriage of daughter of Shah Bali was solemnized with his brother Ameer Muhammad Khan and now a days she was living in her parents house due to differences, and they had gone for reconciliation but her father refused and later on through message they told to send their parents, then they will send the daughter with them. As per F.I.R. On 11-5-2006 the mother of complainant namely Bakht Meena and father Bakht Nusar went to the house of Shah Bali, thereafter mother of the complainant returned back at 8-15 p.m. And disclosed that during talks the accused Shah Bali, Niaz Ali and Naeem were provoked and caught hold his father Bakht Nusar and the wife of accused Shah Bali namely Mst.
2. Raheema inflicted a blow to Bakht Nusar on back side of the head, as such he received serious injury, thereafter complainant went and took his injured father to Ziauddin Hospital, where Doctor declared that he is dead. Dead body of the deceased was shifted to JPMC where A.S.-I. Astam Khan conducted legal proceedings and handed over the dead body to complainant. After post-mortem F.I.R. Was registered. In the medical as well as in the postmortem report the deceased has been shown to have received injury from back side of the head, caused by hard blunt substance.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that actually the incident did not take place in the house. F.I.R. Is delayed about 6-1/2 hours. No any recovery of hard blunt substance has been made by the Police from the spot, and even mushirnama of vardat does not disclose any blood staining spot. Nothing was recovered from the place of Wardat. No any neighbour was prepared to come forward and inform about the truth of the incident. Learned counsel further states that as per F.I.R.
4. No any motive for commission of murder is assigned. The only allegation is that a blow has been given to the deceased by hard substance by Mst. Raheema wife of accused Bali. No overt act is assigned to present applicant accused except grappling with the deceased by accused Shah Bali, Niaz Ali and Naeem, at the most the incident has been shown of sudden provocation. According to the learned Counsel actually the applicant has not participated in any such incident, the prosecution story is concocted one and the F.I.R. Was lodged after consultation. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon 1994 SCM R 393 and 2003 YLR 1348 Lahore.
5. ' Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application. Vehemently, stating that the accused Niaz Ali was arrested on 21-9-2009 as he was absconder the accused is very much connected in the case and is not entitled for grant of bail.
6. ' I have heard both the learned counsel and perused the F.I.R. From the story there appears no any motive suggested by the prosecution for committing murder. The F.I.R. Is delayed and has been lodged after the post-mortem was conducted, from the mushirnama of wardat no any blood stained article or any hard substance was recovered by the A investigating Officer. Role assigned to the accused is not for inflicting any injury. The only allegation against the present accused is that he grappled with deceased along with co-accused Shah Bali and Naeem. Only accused Mst.
7. Raheema is responsible for inflicting the blow of hard blunt substance on the heard of the deceased.
8. ' In the circumstances, the case of the applicant/accused appears to be of further enquiry. After arrest on 31-9-2009, the accused is in Jail. Hence, the bail is granted to the accused Niaz Ali subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,200,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.