Sabir Hussain petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case FIR No, 295 of 2009 dated 27.12.2009 u/S. 302, 34 P.P.C. read with Section 109 P.P.C. registered' at Police Station, Karianwala, District Gujrat, on the statement of Muhammad Saeed.
2. Precisely, the prosecution case is that Abdul Ghaffar elder brother of the complainant divorced his wife Mst. Ghulam Kubra due to estrangement of matrimonial relationship about two years prior to the instant occurrence and thereafter lie married Mst. Asifa Bibi against the wishes of her family members which caused annoyance to her paternal uncle Sabir (petitioner); Abdul Ghaffar and his maternal nephew Mukhtar, therefore migrated to village Bhring and established a clinic there. Sabir (petitioner) used to intimidate Abdul Ghaffar due to the aforesaid fact and also extended him the threats of murder. Abdul Ghaffar and his nephew Mukhtar Ali left village Bhring at 3:30 p.m on 26.12.2009 but did not return alive; the complainant alongwith his brother Raja Muhammad Sarwar set out in search of his brother and nephew and learnt from some persons that the dead bodies of two youthful persons were lying near a Barsati nullah so they went to that place and found the deadbody of Abdul Ghaffar and Mukhtar Ali lying on the road besides their motorcycle; the complainant speculated that both of them had been murdered by Sabir Hussain (petitioner), Faiz Alam and Mst. Sobia, younger sister of Asifa Bibi. The motive, behind the occurrence was that Abdul Ghaffar had contracted marriage with Mst. Asifa Bibi against the wishes and consent of his parents-in-law.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that a bald allegation has been levelled by the complainant against the petitioner without hinting at any connecting evidence; the complainant failed to produce any evidence either direct or indirect during the course of investigation against the petitioner, as such, the real facts of this case continuously remained shrouded in mystery; the Investigation Officer fabricated the statement u/S. 161 Cr.P.C. of Mst. Asifa to the effect that Sabir Hussain, her husband had abetted someone for commission of murder of both the deceased, so, she appeared before the learned Ex-Officio Justice of Peace by way of an application u/S. 22-A/22- B Cr.P.C. seeking relief against the Investigation Officer who had fabricated a bogus statement in her name; the Investigation Officer has failed to collect any direct or circumstantial evidence qua the involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence; the case of the petitioner in the attending circumstances of the case falls within if the purview of further inquiry as envisaged u/S. 497(2)
Cr.P.C.
4. Conversely, learned Deputy Prosecutor General submits that the- petitioner had sufficient reasons to commit the murder of the deceased as he was annoyed over the marriage of Mst. Asifa Bibi with the deceased Abdul Ghaffar; the wife of Abdul Ghaffar Mst. Asifa had joined the investigation and recorded her statement u/S. 161 Cr.P.C. wherein she had categorically fixed the liability of murder of her husband on the petitioner; the Investigation Officer after. conducting intensive investigation in this case has held the petitioner culpable for the murder of both the deceased and has found him involved in the occurrence; lastly contends that the offence with which the petitioner is charged catches the prohibition of Section 497 Cr.P.C. and he is not entitled for the relief prayed for.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Though the details of the occurrence are heart rendering and hair-raising, yet the Courts are not swa yed away by emotions ar.d sentiments and it is the evidence alone which matters for adjudication of bail application of an accused. I find that the Investigation Officer has the way, whereas the rest of them proceeded to Rahim Yar Khan, where at the house of present petitioner Akhtar Cheema, they have been subjected to Zina-bil-Jabr by Yousaf as well as by the present petitioner Akhtar Cheema for 08 days, whereafter the present petitioner Shagufta remained there while Yousaf took her to another house and got herself married after conversion as per Islamic law.
It is a matter of fact that while narrating the said story the alleged third woman Rehana Bibi being present in the car figured nowhere lateron than the reaching of the abductees at Rahim Yar Khan, at the house of Akhtar Cheema, nor it was so described that when she boarded the car. Even otherwise the age of one of the abductee named Rabia is belied by the birth certificate whereby she is of 20 years, whereas in the FIR she is described as of 14 years only. Further admittedly on 26.06.2009 the alleged abductee Rabia was a married under the Christian Law with one Yousaf, the accused So it is hard to believe that the present petitioner in the presence of her legally wedded husband had been committing zina with her in connivance with the said husband. Apart from it, Rabia herself refused to got her statement recorded u/S. 164 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate and appears that the supplementary statement made by the complainant by virtue of written application is totally based upon hearsay evidence. As the present petitioner has been roped into just in the supplementary statement i,e, the application made on 6.8.2009 the story of the FIR is altogether changed especially with regard to. James Masih co-complainant who figures nowhere in the said supplementary statement of the complainant and admittedly is on bail. As the supplementary statement itself is a subject to suspect having no nexus with the contents of the FIR, therefore, hence he is accepted to bail subject to furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.