' This is an application for bail made on behalf of applicant Muhammad Riaz alias Nanna, who, is detained in Crime No,247 of 1992, Garden Police Station under section 302, P.P.C., as amended. The bail application made on his behalf was rejected earlier by learned Sessions Judge (South), Karachi, vide order dated 12-1-1993.
2. On 25-9-1992 there was a petty quarrel between deceased Nafees alias Pappu and applicant Muhammad Riaz alias Nanna over a ring which the applicant had refused to return. During the scuffle the applicant is alleged to have caused one Chhuri blow on the abdomen of deceased Nafees alias Pappu. The members of brotherhood then intervened and taking it a simple injury did not report the matter to the police in the manner as unfolded now. Deceased Nafees alias Pappu however, succumbed to his injury in Civil Hospital, Karachi, and it was at this stage that the statement of Muhammad Shafi, brother of deceased Nafees alias Pappu was recorded under section 154, Cr.P.C., which was incorporated in 154, Cr.P.C, book on 16-10-1992 at 6-35 p.m. During the course of investigation the police examined Muhammad Haroon, Muhammad Ramzan and Muhammad Yousuf, who claimed to have witnessed this incident. One Jawaid, before whom deceased Nafees alias Pappu made dying declaration was also examined under section 161, Cr.P.C.
The applicant who was taken into custody had produced the crime weapon before the police, which was however, not found stained with blood. It was on the basis of this evidence that the applicant was sent up to stand trial.
3. I have heard Mr. Sardar Muhammad Ishaque, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. Abdul Hakeem H. Bijarani, learned AA.-G. For State. The latter has opposed the bail application.
4. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the incident had taken place on 25-9-1992, but the F.I.R. Was lodged on 16-10-1992, and this abnormal delay simpliciter is a ground for extending concession of bail even in a case which is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Reliance is placed upon the case of Karim Haider and others v. The State reported in 1986 SCMR 938, wherein bail was granted to accused persons for the following reasons:-- "Having gone through the impugned order and the record we find that the occurrence took place on 21-6-1984 and Mst. Anwar Begum informed the complainant Abdul Aziz about the detail of the incident on 25-6-1984 yet the complainant lodged the F.I.R. On 5-7-1984 without explaining the inordinate delay in the registration of the case. We are, therefore, of the view that the accused/petitioners are entitled to bail at this stage. Petition is converted into an appeal and allowed. Bail granted to the three accused/petitioners in the sum of rupees twenty-five thousand each with two sureties in the like amount, in each case, to the satisfaction of A.C., Chakwal."
5. From a bare perusal of this order it is apparent that the F.I.R. In that case was lodged after an inordinate delay without explaining it. In the present case there is valid explanation and the extent to which this explanation can be believed cannot be determined by this Court and that too at the stage when the case has not proceeded up to this time and is challaned very recently.
6. It is also contended that at the initial stage the case of the prosecution was that the injury sustained by deceased Nafees alias Pappu was due to fall from the motor-cycle and this story was changed completely on 16-10-1992 after deceased Nafees alias Pappu died in the hospital. It has therefore, been urged that there are two theories going side by side, both destructive to each other, and in such a situation the established position of law is that the one favourable to the accused has got to be preferred. Reliance is placed upon the cases of Siddique and 2 others v, The State reported in 1989 MLD 3288 and Manzoor Hussain Wassan v. The State reported in PLD 1991 Kar. 261, in an attempt to show that the applicant is entitled to the grant of hail on this score alone. The facts of both these cases are however, distinguishable. The medical certificate in respect of deceased Nafees alias Pappu dated 25-9-1992 is on record which shows that the only injury sustained by deceased was by means of sharp cutting substance. This position is further confirmed from the postmortem report available on record, which shows that deceased Nafees alias Pappu died due to stab wound.
9. Having regard to the above factual position, I see no substance in this bail application, which is accordingly dismissed. It may however, be repeated before the trial Court after P.Ws. Muhammad Haroon, Muhammad Ramzan, Muhammad Yousuf and Jawaid are examined. It will be appreciated if the above witnesses are examined by the trial Court at an early date to enable the applicant to repeat his bail application.