' By this order propose to dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous No,611 and 612 of 1995, as both of them arise out of the same F.I.R.
2. The accused-petitioners are charged in F.I.R. No,643, dated 24-9-1994, registered at Police Station, Kalu Khan under section 302/324/34, P.P.C. For the murder of Mst.. Sareer aged about 10 years. After their arrest they applied for their release on bail to the Illaqa Magistrate, but their applications were rejected. Thereafter they moved the Court of Sessions for the same relief, but they failed thereto as well.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, complainant and the State and have gone through the record.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case as due to pitch dark night they could not be identified; that they are stated to have fired from the field having maize crop of 6' height and that non-recovery of blood from the spot indicates that the occurrence has not taken place in the manner as set forth by the prosecution. He referred to the application to Tajbar and stressed that the complainant party, in order to pressurize the accused petitioners for effecting compromise in earlier case, killed the minor girl and plastered the charge against the petitioners, which finds support from the statements of Syed Qaddar Shah and 7 others. According to him the case requires further inquiry into the matter and thus the petitioners deserve bail.
5. Opposing the bail application, learned counsel for the State assisted by complainant's counsel maintained that the F.I.R. Was lodged within one and a half hour of the occurrence in police station, which was at a distance of 5/6 Km. Eliminates the possibility of fabrication/false implication or non-identification. It was urged that the story tailored by the defense is simply absurd as one cannot even conceive that anybody would kill his own daughter to pressurize the opponent for compromise. The petitioners after the occurrence absconded and remained in hiding for a noticeable period which disentitles them to bail.
6. The promptly lodged report rules out the concoction or a false charge against the accused- petitioners. All the three accused-petitioners have been charged by name in F.I.R. For firing at the complainant party whereby the girl got hit and then was taken in injured condition to the police station. After recording the report she was referred, to hospital where she succumbed to her injury.
The very fact that the girl was taken in an injured condition to the police station falsifies the defense story that she was killed by the complainant party and false charge was labeled against the petitioners. The accused-petitioners absconded after the occurrence and remained fugitive from law for a considerable period for which no plausible explanation could be advanced. One of the accused namely Farhad is still at large. The application which was greatly stressed upon, cannot lend any help to the petitioners for two-fold' reasons, firstly, it being of a dubious character and secondly it is based on suppositions. The application containing unbelievable story was addressed to S.P., Swabi on the very next day of the occurrence i,e, on 25-9-1994 which was marked, to S.H.O., Police Station Kalu Khan for enquiry and report but it is strange to note that the date given under the initial is 20-9 i,e, 5 days prior to date of application itself. This application was moved by Tajbar Shah wheri the accused named in that F.I.R. Had already absconded. Had the charge been false or concocted, they should not have gone into hiding for 8/9 months but should have faced the charge. The S.H.O. After recording the statements of Syed Qadar Shah and others, opined that it was rumored that murder was committed by Wazir and Aurangzeb P.Os. But none was coming forward to depose as an eyewitness, hence their depositions can only be treated as hypothetical. It is a settled law that fugitive from law loses some of the normal rights granted by the procedural and substantive law, and noticeable ascendance disentitles the absconders to the concession of bail notwithstanding the merits of the case. There is no fading on the record either of the officer-in-charge of the police station or of Court that there are no reasonable ground for believing that the accused has committed a non-boilable offence and without such a finding the accused cannot press into service the ground of further inquiry for their release on bail.
' In view of the direct charge supported by an eye-witness coupled with noticeable long ascendance sufficiently provide reasonable grounds to believe that the accused-petitioners are guilty of offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, therefore, their applications for bail are dismissed.