The petitioners alongwith Amira and another are charged with the murder of Khan Muhammad deceased on the night of 14-4-1982.
2. The deceased was a P.W. Against the petitioners in a case under section 325JP.P.C. They wanted that he should not depose against them to which he was not agreeable. Consequently, he was murdered while he was going to Chah Mochiwala and his dead body was found lying in a field next morning by the complainant. In the post-mortem examination one extensive injury on the neck of the deceased was found. It is stated that during investigation Akbar (not named in the F.I.R.) and Amira co-accused were found guilty while the petitioners were declared innocent. Amira, who had led to the recovery of utensils belonging to the deceased and his blood-stained shirt, was admitted to bail by my learned brother Khizar Hayat, J. On 21-5-1984. The petitioners were also granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, on 8-7-1982 which was, however, later on cancelled by another Additional Sessions Judge namely Ahmad Bakhsh Bapa who was seized of the complaint case instituted by Jan Muhammad, brother of the deceased. The learned Additional Sessions Judge observed that there was a possibility of the petitioners' tampering with the evidence to be adduced against them.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that during police investigation nothing incriminating was recovered from the possession or at the instance of the petitioners and there was no direct evidence against them and the case rested on the evidence of extra-judicial confession of Akbar who implicated himself alone in the commission of the crime. Neither there was evidence of last seen nor of Wajtakkar against the petitioners, it is stated.
4. Learned Assistant Advocate-General has opposed the bail. According to him, Akbar co-accused had stated in his extra-judicial confession that he had committed the murder in consultation with the present petitioners. He states that the petitioners are not entitled to bail because of the availability of circumstantial evidence against them.
5. Amira co-accused has since been bailed out by this Court. Excepting the evidence of motive and the extra--judicial confession by Akbar there is no other circumstance to link them with the offence. Even Akbar in his statement, has not said that the petitioners were present alongwith him at the relevant time. In these circumstances, it appears to be a case of further inquiry. Accordingly, I admit the petitioners to bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. Muzaffargarh.