ORDERMIAN GHULAM AHMAD, J.- Zafar Ullah petitioner has involvement in a murder case and has applied for bail.
2. His counsel has ably and effectively argued, in urging that insignificant role having been attributed to him, he is entitled to the concession of bail. Nasrullah, Ashraf and Zafar Ullah sons of Taj and their nephew Asm at Ullah (son of Ashraf) have been named as accused in the FIR dated 1.4.1994, lodged at P3. Sharaqpur, District Sheikhupura, on the statement of Barkat Ali, whose brother Muhammad Hanif was seriously injured in the occurrence, and later on 12.4.1994, he breathed his last. It is pointed out that Ashraf Gorraya SI had initially investigated the case and formed an opinion that not only Zafar Ullah, even Ashraf and his son Asm at Ullah were innocent and Nasrullah alone had been responsible for infliction of injuries on the person of Muhammad Hanif, which eventually proved fatal The SI/SHO had made an observation that the complainant party was adamant that all the persons nominated as accused in the FIR had actively participated in the occurrence and all of them were thereforeMuhammad Hussain KYameen and others being challaned. Learned counsel for the complainant however maintains that not mly Muhammad Ashraf SI/SHO, but even Muhammad Farooq DSP Ferozewala lad held all the accused to be at fault, and, on completion of investigation, they tad all been challaned.
3. Whereas Nasrullah, Ashraf and Ism at Ullah were shown to be all rmed with lethal weapons, Zafar Ullah alias Bhola, even according to the FIR, /as empty-handed, and was stated to have raised lalkara and not caused any njuiy to the deceased. Submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner s that he has falsely been roped in, being brother of Nasrullah and Ashraf, so that tone of them enjoys liberty and pursues this litigation in right earnest. Number of ulings have been cited in support of their respective stand-points by the learned counsel for the parties, which however need not be quoted and discussed, the reason being that the case has been fixed for trial on 31.7.94, in the Court of Ch. Jaz Mahmood, Addl Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura. Had this development not aken place, I might have favourably considered the entitlement of the applicant- accused to the privilege of bail, and the same might have been conceded. Since Lowever the trial is going to commence, within the next few days, propriety. Lemands that indulgence of enlargement on bail should not be extended to any >ne of the accused persons. It is expected that the learned AddL Sessions Judge vould conclude the trial within 3-4 days, and particularly when during vacation >eriod, in early August, he will be doing criminal work exclusively, it will not be lifficult for him to bring the trial to its end, before he proceeds on summer spelL -earned counsel for the complainant says, he sincerely undertakes not to ask for any adjournment. All the P.Ws are said to have been served and will be in ittendance in the court on 31.7.1994. This being the position, the petitioner must tot insist on his release on bail, and should rather wait for the end of the trial.
4. With these observations, Zafrullah's bail petition is dismissed. A copy >f the order may be conveyed to the court concerned, without any amount of lelay.