' ANWAR HUSSAIN, J.---The Applicant/Accused by way of this Post-arrest Bail Application, seeks Pre-arrest Bail in Crime No, 121 of 2014 under Sections 302 and 34, P.P.C. P.S. Qazi Ahmed, which after Challan pending trial as Sessions Case No, 807 of 2015, before. The learned IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Shaheed Benazirabad.
2. The prosecution story as per FIR is that Complainant viz. Ali Mukhtiar and his brother Akhtiar Ali, worked at Dubai. In the month of April, 2014, Complainant's said brother went to their native village and on 11.5.2014 contracted love marriage to Mst. Laila alias Dahi, daughter of Muhammad Yousif Khaskheli, aged about 20 years, with consent of her mother and brother viz. Mst. Darya Khatoon and Kamil Khaskheli respectively. The said Kamil on account of his marriage ceremony took away his said sister and Complainant's said brother went back to Dubai. The Complainant and his said brother were in Dubai, where on 2.6.2014, saw News on. KTN/T.V. Channel that said Mst. Laila, murdered by her brother Ali Nawaz Khaskheli. Then the Complainant and his said brother were informed on Mobile Phone by Ghulam Sarwar and Alam, residents of their illegal, that while on a way for work they have seen Mst. Laila, along with Mst. Darya Khatoon and Mst. Lal Khatoon, mother and wife, respectively, of Kamil Khaskheli going towards Qazi Ahmed City for taking medicine, meanwhile Ali Nawaz, with pistol and Shahnawaz with hatchet, came over there and asked to their mother/ Mst. Darya. Khatoon that since their sister Mst. Laila, has contracted love marriage, and they would kill Mst. Laila. Accused Ali Nawaz caused pistol fire on the abdomen of Mst. Laila, who fell down and Accused Shahnawaz inflicted hatchet blows on the head of Mst. Laila. Mst. Darya Khatoon and Mst. Lal Khatoon; intervened for saving Mst. Laila the Accused Shahnawaz inflicted hatchet blows to them on their face and head receptively. Mst. Laila died on spot and Accused persons run away. Then Kamil Khaskheli, took dead body of Mst. Laila and said injured ladies to Qazi Ahmed Hospital and after Post mortem buried the dead body.
3. The Complainant after obtaining leave from Dubai came here and obtained order under Section 22-A, Cr.P.C. From the Sessions Court and reported the Crime against the said Accused persons, FIR registered.
4. Heard the arguments of learned Counsel for the Applicant, learned Counsel for Complainant, who gave no objection for the grant of Bail and learned DDPP, who opposed the grant of Bail.
5. I have observed as follows:-- a. It is a broad day light murder of a young girl caused by her two brothers as she married out her own free will. The Accused during the incident of murder caused hatchet blows to deceased girl, her mother and sister-in-law, who intervened to save the deceased; b. That the Applicant/Accused himself has confessed that he along with his brother co-accused have committed the murder of their sister as she married against their will and wish; c. That the present Applicant has been arrested on the next day of lodging of FIR and has confessed the commission of murder and on his pointation the crime weapon i.e,, blood stained hatchet was recovered, for which there are Statement of Applicant, Recovery of Memo, and Chemical Examiner Report in the Police File; d. That other co-accused brother of Applicant is still at large and accordingly Challan has been submitted in the matter; e. Earlier the Applicant filed Bail Application before the Trial Court, and thereafter he filed Affidavits of Prosecution Witnesses, who gave no objection to the grant of bail to the Applicant, but the said Bail Application was dismissed. f. That, thereafter, the Applicant filed Bail Application before this Court, wherein the Applicant has filed Affidavits of the Prosecution Witnesses, but the said Bail Application was withdrawn on the ground that the Applicant will file fresh Bail Application, before the Trial Court along with such Affidavits. Then, the Applicant filed Bail Application before the learned Sessions Judge, which, was dismissed vide Order dated 27.5.2015, wherein it has been observed that the Affidavits of Witnesses, were earlier filed with 1st Bail Application before the Trial Court, which was dismissed before this Court and such facts were not pointed out the High Court; as such the IInd Bail Application before the Sessions Judge, is almost on the same ground; g. That now in this Bail Application the Applicant has not filed the Affidavits of the Prosecution Witnesses, before this Court, rather has relied upon the Photostat copies of the Affidavits submitted before the learned Sessions Judge. h. That since this is broad day light murder, wherein injuries to other ladies have been caused, recovery of hatchet has been made with human blood at the instance of Applicant, so the affidavits of the Prosecution Witnesses are nothing, but somersault and cannot be equated with the evidence in presence of Statement under Section 161, Cr.P.C, for which reliance is placed on PLD 1997 SC 347, 2006 SCM R 1265, PLD 1990 SC 83, 2013 PCr.LJ 904 (Sindh), 1999 PCr.LJ 1696 (Karachi), 2004 PCr.L.J 550 (Lahore) and 1999 MLD 1254 Lahore; i. The FIR has been lodged by the Complainant in respect of murder of his sister-in-law after coming to Pakistan which is a plausible explanation for delay in lodging the FIR. j. That the incident is of a heinous offence, punishable with Death and Life Imprisonment and the Deponents of Affidavits, who are P.Ws., are close relatives, including mother and sister-in-law, of Applicant and Co-accused, cannot be of any help to the Applicant at the Bail stage.
'In view of the above, the Applicant is not entitled for concession of Bail. Hence this Bail Application is dismissed. However, learned Trial Court is directed to take necessary steps for expeditious disposal of the case.
' The observations made herein-above are tentative in nature and shall not prejudice the case is either side at Trial.