Saleem aged 18 and Munir aged 24 are accused of having committed the murder of Manzoor Hussain aged 20 years on 27th June, 1980 at about 4.00 p. m. Their bail application was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge on 4th January; 1981. Hence this petition.
2. According to the F. I. R. Which has been recorded at the instance of Hazoor Bakhsh, the paternal uncle of the deceased and his father-in---law, who is the Reader to the Civil Judge at Alipur, the deceased was Ahmad in the Court of the said Civil Judge. The deceased did not return home on 26th June, 1980 after Court work. On the next day, which happened to be a Friday the informant is alleged to have tried to find out the whereabouts of the deceased before prayer time from Muhammad Hussain, steno of the said Civil Judge. The informant went to the room of the Ahlmad and found the deceased working there in the Company of one Ibrar Ahmad P. W. And another person. The informant asked the deceased to accompany him back home after prayers. Thereafter the informant and Muhammad Hussain came out leaving the deceased and his companion in the room. After the prayers the informant in the company of Ghulam Haider and Atta Hussain a brother of the informant passed near the Court premises on their way back home, and on finding the deceased absent asked Muhammad Hussain about his whereabouts. They were informed that the deceased had gone to rest at the Chuabara of Muhammad Hussain with his companion. The three thereafter went to the said Chaubara and found the body of the deceased in blood. It appears that on the same day after about an hour, a supplementary state--ment was got recorded by the informant in which it was stated that Saleem petitioner had befriended the deceased and Ibrar afore-referred. It was further stated that Munir petitioner also had friendship with Saleem petitioner and that Munir did not like the newly developed friendship between the deceased and Saleem petitioner. It is further stated that in this contest Munir had an altercation with the deceased and about a month prior to the occurrence had asked the informant to tell the deceased to let go Saleem otherwise the consequences would not be good. According to this supplementary statement it appears that Saleem had relations both with the deceased and his co-accused Munir.
3. It appears that the petitioners were arrested after a statement had been recorded of Abdul Wahid P. W. On 2nd July, 1980 to the effect that at 4.30 p. m. On the day of occurrence, he saw the petitioners coming out of the Chaubara in a disturbed state. It appears that during the course of investigation Ibrar P. W. Afore-referred stated that he had been told by the deceased on the day of occurrence, that Salim petitioner would be coming to him at 4.30 that after-noon. Also a statement was made by Muhammad Hussain P. W. Before-referred to the effect that the deceased had come to see Saleem petitioner. It was in -these circumstances that on 3rd July, 1980 the petitioners were arrested from their shops on the basis of the circumstantial evidence revealed during the course of investigation. According to prosecution at the time of their arrest the petitioners were in an injured condition and learned A. A.-G. States that the medico-legal examination showed that Saleem petitioner carried 4 sharp-edged injuries on his person whereas Munir petitioner carried 2 sharp- edged injuries on his person and that these injuries were of 7 days duration. The prosecution also claims that the petitioners led to the recovery of the weapons of offence, viz a razor at the instance of Saleem who is a barber by profession and a knife at the instance of Munir who is a butcher by profession. According to A. A.-G. These weapons were found smeared with blood and subsequent reports of the Chemical Examiner and Serologist are positive. Also the accused led to the recovery of their blood-stained clothes from their respective houses which were also sent for examination and reports according to learned A. A.-G, are positive.
4. The case against the petitioners as such is based on the supple--mentary statement of the informant, recoveries effected from the petitioner and the statements of the witnesses recorded during the course of investiga--tion. It is a case of circumstantial evidence.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that it is apparent from the prosecution case that the two petitioners were rivals of each other for the favour of the deceased and that it has not been explained by the prosecution how and why they colluded together to cause the death of the deceased. He has further argued that the Post-Mortem Report of the deceased shows that he suffered from seven simple injuries and one grievous injury, the latter being a cut in the neck below the chin which severed the trachea. The deceased had died of this injury and according to post- mortem report the death was instantaneous. Learned counsel has argued that the nature of the other injuries which are on the fore-head, left arm, left shoulder, right back and back of head show that there was a struggle and further they do not indicate that these injuries were caused at the hands of two assailants. Learned counsel has argued further that Abdul Wahid P. W. Who is alleged to have identified the accused coming out of the Chaubara was a witness whose presence at the spot was not explainable. He further argued that the arrest of the peti--tioners from their shops and the subsequent recoveries from them of their weapons and clothes is unbelievable for in normal circumstances they could not be expected to keep these things in storage for presentation to the police at the time of their arrest. He has argued that the recoveries which have been attested by Hazoor Bakhsh the informant and Abdul Wahid P. Ws. Before-referred cannot be relied upon as both these witnesses are highly interested and do not belong to the vicinity from where the recoveries took place.
6. Learned A. A.-G. Has argued that the case of the prosecution finds support from the supplementary statement of the informant recorded within one hour of the F. I. R. The recoveries of the weapons of offence and. The clothes at the istance of the accused which have been found to be stained with human blood, the statements of Abdul Wahid P. W., Ibrar P. W. And Muhammad Hussain P. W. Who positively implicate the petitioners in the commission of the said offence and the injuries found on the person of both the petitioners which according to medico--legal reports are with sharp-edged weapons and of one week duration. Learned A. A.-G. Argued that the two petitioners were friends of each other before-the deceased bad developed relationship with Saleem and that in the circumstances the story of the prosecution with regard to the motive, recovery, medical evidence and circumstantial evidence is plausible.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that in these circum--stances at the most the case against the petitioners is one of further enquiry. As has been noted, the evidence which the prosecution intend to lead before the trial Court is circumstantial in nature and is supported by the recoveries, medical evidence and testimony of eye-witnesses. There is A also evidence of the petitioners having been last seen with the deceased. 1n these circumstances I do not consider it to be a fit case for allowing concession of bail to the petitioners. Both of whom are accused of an offence entailing the extreme penalty of death. The petition is, therefore, rejected.