' MAZHAR IQBAL SIDHU, Petitioner Shahid Mehmood Ch. Has prayed for the grant of post-arrest bail in a case registered vide FIR No,400/16 dated 18.4.2016 under sections 302/34, P.P.C. At P.S. Allama Iqbal Town, Lahore, on the complaint of Asia Kanwal Kashif.
' Partway investigation vide case diary No,24 dated 17.6.2016 offences under sections 379/411, P.P.C.
Were added and vide case diary No,31 dated 25.6.2016 offence under section 201, P.P.C. Was added to the FIR.
2. The Woe-wodge complainant Mst. Asia Kanwal Kashif, widow of the deceased described rueful incident that her husband Khawaja Kashif Butt was employee in T.M.O. Nishter Town, Lahore as Assistant Building Inspector who on 16.4.2016 at about 3.00 p.m. By stating that he was going to his office by Motorcycle 125 Honda, red colour (APL) and also took along a bank cheque amounting to rupees one lac. On 17.4.2016 at about 10.30 a.m., an unknown person made a telephonic call through a cell phone No,0302-8414006 attended to by the complainant directing her to get talked with her husband Kashif Butt, the deceased who after having talked on the telephone became seriously worried and said that telephone number of his younger brother namely Yasir living in America may be given, thereafter, the call dropped. Second call was not attended. On 18.4.2016, in the morning time, brothers of the complainant namely Majeed Ahmad and Muhammad Irfan came to the complainant to know about Kashif and told her that on 17.4.2016 at about 4.00 p.m., they were passing in front of Rahim General Store on a motorcycle where they saw the deceased along with his friend Frid Khan and they were chalking out a program to go to some other friend.
They have further apprised the complainant that they saw the deceased dismal. At about 5.00 a.m., when above said brothers of the complainant were passing through near Khyber block School of Special Education, Allama Iqbal Town, Lahore saw a car coming behind speedily, threw a dead body and escaped. The said car was of white colour and three unknown persons were boarding therein. When they saw it, recognized as of Khawaja Kashif Butt, the husband of the complainant and case was lodged.
' Partway investigation, offences were added and telephone number mentioned in the FIR led the Investigating Officer to locate the culprits, consequently, the petitioner was found involved in this case. He was arrested on 05.6.2016, to jail on 6.06.2016 where his identity-parade was held under the supervision of learned Magistrate on 11.6.2016 and was identified by the PWs. During the investigation, cell phone No,0302-8414006 was found belonging to the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that case was registered against unknown culprits; no eye-witness of the fact of murder of deceased exists; postmortem-report has revealed no visible- injury on the dead body of deceased Kh. Kashif Butt whereas reliable evidence does not exist to connect the petitioner with the commission of Crime. So far as recovery of certain articles is concerned, it has been argued that the same have been planted upon the petitioner to connect him with the commission of murder and the material permits to bring the case of the petitioner within the mischief of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, instant petition may be allowed.
4. Learned DPG assisted by learned counsel for the complainant; has opposed the submissions and argued that the cell phone number mentioned in the FIR is one of the decisive factor in this case; the police through the assistance of Calls Data Record (CDR) located the petitioner its owner, then he was apprehended on 05.6.2016, thereafter, through identity-parade, he was identified who threw the dead body of the deceased and on his physical remand, after the said proceedings, he got recovered motor-bike of the deceased, mobile phone set, pointed out the place of throwing of dead body and also got recovered the automobile used for the throwing of the dead-body and the articles got recovered including automobile/car were also identified by the PWs. Further submitted that petitioner is a habitual offender, as many as 37 other criminal cases have been registered against him, in this way, in absence of any wrath or malevolence, no case for the grant of bail is made out, hence, instant petition may be dismissed.
' Learned counsel for the complainant has further argued that priorly the PWs have no spite either to become false witnesses or to falsely involve the petitioner and this fact again shows the bona fide of the prosecution that case was registered against unknown persons. Further maintained that the C.D.R. In fact assisted the police to discover the accused as petitioner in this case, thereafter, recovery of articles belonging to the deceased and all facts again lead to the conclusion that the petitioner was the perpetrator of slaying. Further maintained that offence alleged against the petitioner falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.
5. Heard intently. Record gone through.
6. Without a fear of contradiction, case was lodged against unacquainted persons and no direct evidence exists as to the commission of murder of the deceased. Instant case hinges upon the circumstantial evidence. One of a vital circumstance is the cell number through which woebegone complainant heard the call and then talked to the deceased/her husband. This became the 'linchpin' of this case for the investigation. Calls Data Record (CDR) was collected is available on the police file consisting of 34 pages. Cell phone number mentioned in the FIR was identified as of the petitioner, thereafter; he was apprehended by the police on 05.6.2016 to jail on 06.6.2016. On 11.6.2016; he was subjected to test-identification-parade in which he was identified by the PWs namely Majeed Ahmad and Muhammad Irfan, then on 17.6.2016, he got recovered mobile telephone set of the deceased and on 20.6.2016 the motor-bike Honda 125, then again on 21.6.2016 he pointed out the place where the dead body was thrown. The petitioner again on 23.6.2016, got recovered motorcar bearing No,8977-LEE (Toyota Corolla GLI). All articles were identified by the PWs through 'Fard Shanakhat' on 25.6.2016, in this way; expost-facto evidence ' connects the petitioner with the commission of murder of the deceased. Although the post mortem report does not evince any visible evidence yet the final opinion after all the reports of the doctors for cause of death shows that the cause of death was combined effect of 'morphine poisoning' and other remarks have also been mentioned in the report. Police case diaries have also been gone through and it has been learnt that deceased remained with the petitioner prior to his throwing of dead body.
' All the facts and circumstances prima-facie are persuasive leading no other conclusion except that the petitioner has committed the murder of deceased. He has been found guilty partway investigation. The offence alleged falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, no case for the grant of bail is made in his "favour. Thus, instant petition stands dismissed.