' This is a petition under Section 497, Cr.P.C. For grant of post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 330/2013 dated 08.12.2013 for the offence under Sections 302/34, PPC registered with Police Station Kundian, District Mianwali.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant alongwith Auwn Ahmed and Amir Waqas went to R.H.0 Kundian for some work. At about 4/5 p.m when they coming on motorcycle, reached in front of Mosque Fezan-i-Madina, Sher Afgan son of Abdul Hayee was standing in front of gate of his house, when suddenly Rehan Farooq Khan and Muhammad Azeem Khan came there on a motorcycle and both of them fired at Sher Afghan with their pistols. Fire of Rehan Farooq hit on the head of Sher Afghan, who fell down. Both the accused went towards north and raised lalkara that whoever come forward will be killed. Sher Afghan expired on the spot. Motive behind the occurrence is that Sher Afghan had enmity of murder with the accused and due to that enmity they killed Sher Afghan. Hence this FIR.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. The main emphasis of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was arrested on 1.12.2014 and remained on physical remand ' but nothing was recovered from him and that during the investigation he has been declared innocent. He has relied upon the case law oited as Nisar Ahmad alias Shari and another vs The State (2004 MLD 1272) and Ch. Muhammad Yousaf Sindhu vs. The State (PLD 1990 Lahore 161).
5. Record reflects that the FIR was promptly lodged as the occurrence took place on 4.15 pm on 08.12.2013 and the case was registered at 4.50 pm on the same date. In the said circumstances, possibility of deliberations before registration of the FIR cannot be assumed. The petitioner has been nominated with specific role of causing injury to the deceased Sher Afghan Khan which caused the death. The medical evidence corroborate with the ocular account. The eye-witnesses got recorded their statements under Section 161 Cr.PC in line with the contents of the FIR. In such circumstances, it has rightly been observed by the learned ASJ while dismissing the bail application of the petitioner, that ipsi dixit of the police is not binding on the Court.
6. There is another aspect of the case that after lodging of FIR, the petitioner remained absconder and was arrested on 01.12.2014 and no justification could be given by the learned counsel for the petitioner for such abscondence Primafacie, there is incriminating material against the petitioner to connect him with the commission of offence. In these circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail after arrest. Resultant, this bail application is hereby dismissed.
7. It is made clear that the observations made here-in-above shall not prejudice the merits of the case which will be decided on its own merits in accordance with law by the trial Court.