ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.---Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner Mushtaq Ahmad has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No, 149/2016, dated 14.04.2016 registered at Police Station Manawala District Sheikhupura in respect of offences under sections 302, 109, 34, P.P.C.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of this case it has been noticed by this Court that this is bail after arrest and only tentative assessment is required at this stage. The allegation against the petitioner in the FIR is that he committed the murder of Shakila Bibi daughter of complainant.
Later on, one Mst. Nabila Bibi, Muhammad Akram and Zohra Bibi recorded their statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. on 27.05.2016. Admittedly, the statements of said Nabila Bibi as well as both the witnesses Akram and Zohra Bibi was recorded by the investigation officer under section 161, Cr.P.C. after about one month and thirteen days of the occurrence and the fact why they have remained mum for such a long period has casts serious doubt in this case as far as present petitioner is concerned. It is settled law that delayed statements of PWs recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. have got little value. Mst. Nabila Bibi also lodged case FIR No, 248/2016 dated 28.06.2016 under sections 302, 109, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Manawala District Sheikhupura and implicated the petitioner as well as Allah Tawakal complainant of this case along with co-accused Allah Ditta, Muhammad Usman alias Imran and Imran Mahmood alias Ansar Man. During investigation, the case FIR No, 248/2016 dated 28.06.2016 under sections 302, 109, P.P.C. was recommended for cancellation by the Investigating Officer, however, the cancellation report was disagreed by the learned Area Magistrate vide order dated 20.07.2017 and the matter was referred to learned Sessions Judge for trial. The complainant Allah Tawakal has also tendered his affidavit before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura and also recorded his statement that he nominated the petitioner due to suspicion and that he has no objection for acceptance of bail petition of petitioner. The PW Saif Ullah also filed his affidavit and recorded his statement that he has not seen the occurrence. All these facts create serious doubt in the prosecution story and it is settled law that benefit of doubt arising out of prosecution case can be extended to accused even at bail stage. There is denying of the fact that Mst. Nabila Bibi also filed private complaint with different date, time and story with different set of witnesses namely Dost Muhammad and Sami Ullah instead of Muhammad Akram and Zohra Bibi who recorded their statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. before the Investigating Officer. The petitioner is previous non-convict, never involved in any criminal case, he is behind the bars since 27.05.2016 without any fruitful progress towards his trial; investigation qua him is complete; challan has been submitted in the learned trial court; nobody could be kept in jail for an indefinite period because it amounts to imprisonment before conviction; mere heinousness of offence is no ground to withheld discretion of post-arrest bail in favour of an accused; no useful purpose would be served by keeping him behind the bars, thus, his further incarceration would not serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.
3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,2,00,000/- (Rupees two hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.
4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only.