' JAMES JOSEPH, J. --- Petitioner Abdul Majeed seeks post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 437/2013, dated 04.12.2013 under Section 302/460, P.P.C. Registered at P.S. Shehar Sultan, District Muzaffargarh.
2. Briefly the prosecution story as un-folded in the F.I.R. Is that the petitioner alongwith his co- accused committed the murder of Muhammad Chokidar and also took away wheat from the Pasco Centre Kotla Sultan Shah.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. Admittedly the petitioner is neither named in the F.I.R. Nor he was put to any identification parade/test. The petitioner, for the first time, was involved by the complainant through supplementary statement made on 18.05.2014 i.e, exactly after five months and 14 days of the occurrence upon the information given to the complainant by Allah Wasaya and Din Muhammad co-accused who made confession under police custody before the complainant implicating the petitioner in the instant case. Under Articles 38 & 39 of the Qunoon-e-Shahadat Order, 1984 such kind of confession is inadmissible in the eyes of law. Even otherwise no confession was made by the petitioner. He was thoroughly investigated but nothing incriminating was recovered from his possession. He is behind the bars since his arrest. Investigation against the petitioner is complete and challan has been submitted before the Trial Court where trial statedly has not commenced so-far. The petitioner is statedly previously non- convict and there is no record against him No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period.
Reliance is placed on the case of "Abid Ali alias Ali v. The State" (2011 SCM R 161) wherein the apex Court was pleased to hold as follows:- "It is an admitted fact that name of the petitioner is not mentioned in the F.I.R. But his name was included in the list of accused in supplementary statement. There is no explanation available in this regard, therefore, the case of the petitioner falls under the category of further inquiry. See Tahir Abbas v. The State (2003 SCM R 426). Although the challan has been submitted in the Court and the case was fixed for hearing but still prima facie the case of the petitioner appears to be one of further inquiry and is covered under provisions of Section 497, Cr.P.C., then it becomes a right of accused that he be released on bail and practice of refusal in such cases where challan is submitted should not he bar to refuse the right"
5. For what has been discussed above the matter to the extent of petitioner has become one of further inquiry as contemplated under sub-section (2) of Section 497 of Cr.P.C. Resultantly the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs, 200,000/- (Rupees two lacs only) with two sureties in the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court.
6. It is pertinent to mention here that the observations made supra are tentative in nature. Bail after arrest granted.