' Petitioner is accused of committing murder of his sister Mst. Bakhtawar Mai wife of Ghulam Hussain, complainant, on 27-3-1983. According to the prosecution, he took Mst. Bakhtawar with him from the house of her husband Ghulam Hussain, on 27-3-1983 on the pretext that he needed her help as his another sister Mst. Jindan Mai was expecting a child. The petitioner allegedly made a confession before Usman Shah, Amir Bakhsh, Sobha P.Ws and Ghulam Hussain complainant that while he was taking her from the house of her husband to his house he killed her on the way by strangulation. Earlier, Mat. Bakhtawar had been buried for she was taken to have met a natural death. On 30-3-1983 case was registered against the petitioner at the instance of Ghulam Hussain, husband of the deceased. In post-mortem examination the doctor opined that she had died of asphyxia caused through strangulation. The petitioner was arrested who is in jail since 30-3-1983.
Having remained unsuccessful before Sessions Judge, the petitioner has approached this Court for the grant of bail.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as for State and also perused the record.
3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that there is no direct evidence to connect him with the murder. It is next contended that the police has collected circumstantial evidence in the nature of "last seen" and "extrajudicial confession" alleged to have been made by the petitioner before Usman Shah, Amir Bakhsh, Sobha and Ghulam Hussain PWs and out of whom Usman Shah, Sobha and Ghulam Hussain have sworn affidavits absolving the petitioner from the charge. It is, therefore, emphasized that the case against the petitioner not only hinges on weaker evidence rather this is e case of no evidence. As against this, learned counsel for the State submits that Amir Bakhsh P.W still stands by the prosecution and his evidence alone would be sufficient to bring home the charge of murder td the petitioner.
4. Having considered the arguments of the learned counsel with care I find that three witnesses out of our have resoled including the complainant who is husband of the deceased. The witnesses have appeared in Court to support their affidavits and have been identified by the Investigating Officer before me. The case of the petitioner thus falls within the provision of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C., necessitating further inquiry as to the guilt or otherwise of the petitioner. I am, therefore, inclined to allow this petition. The petitioner be released on bail subject to his furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs,10,000 (Rupees ten thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Jampur.