' Mst. Khurshid Bibi petitioner seeks her bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No,121 of 1996, dated 28th May, 1996 under section 203, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Kassowal, District Sahiwal at the instance of Muhammad Younas complainant for the alleged murder of Mst. Zahida Khalid.
2. Briefly the facts of the case are that Mst. Zahida Khalid was living in the house of the complainant for the last about 6/7 years and was studying in 6th class. On 26-5-1996 the complainant was away in the fields, while the other members of his family were at Jhang and Kassowal except the deceased who was in the house all alone. The complainant returned at about 11 a.m. From the fields and found the said Zahida Khalid lying dead under the cot. The matter was reported to the police where Rapat No,23, dated 26-5-1996 was recorded in the daily diary and the dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. It was on receipt of the said report that case registered under section 302, P.P.C. On 28-5-1996 and the investigation was resumed.
3. The petitioner was arrested on 25-6-1996 as she was stated to have made an extra-judicial confession before Mst. Suray.a, Matloob and Manzoor P.Ws. On 6-6-1996. After due investigation the petitioner was challenged to Court to face her trial.
4. The petitioner had earlier applied for her bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chichawatni but the same was refused on 22-7-1996. Hence this petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there was no direct evidence to connect the petitioner with the crime; that even no suspicion was laid on her in the Rapat recorded on 26-5- 1996 or in the F.I.R. Which was subsequently registered at the police station on 28-5-1996; that 10/11 days after the alleged occurrence, evidence of extra-judicial confession was maneuvered from the three P.Ws. Who were closely related to the deceased; that there was no other incriminating material to corroborate the above said weak type of evidence which was not sufficient to be placed reliance on, for the conviction of the petitioner; that the petitioner has been undergoing the rigors of jail for the last about 7/8 months but there was no material progress at the trial. Lastly it was submitted that the petitioner being a woman her case was covered by proviso 1 to section 497, Cr.P.C. Entitling the petitioner to the concession of bail.
6. Learned counsel for the complainant as well as for the State have opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner by submitting that trial was on and statement of one witness has already been recorded.
7. 1 have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record carefully.
8. Admittedly, the petitioner was neither named in the Rapt nor any suspicion was laid on her in the F.I.R. Which was subsequently registered on 28-5-1996. It was after about 10/11 days of the occurrence that the three P.Ws. Closely related to the deceased appeared before the Investigating Officer and implicated the petitioner as an accused by alleging that the petitioner has made extra- judicial confession before them. This being the only evidence against the petitioner, the evidentiary value of, which would be appraised by the learned trial Court. No other evidence has been led by the prosecution so as to strengthen the said extra-judicial confession which was itself a weaker type of evidence to be pressed into service against the accused/petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner being a woman, her case would also attract the proviso 1 to section 497, Cr.P.C. The petitioner was in the lock-up for the last about 7/8 months and the conclusion of the trial was not in sight. Prima facie no reasonable grounds are made out to believe that the petitioner has committed the offence alleged against her.
9. Under the above circumstances and without going deep into the merits is the case so as to avoid prejudice to the cause of either party, the petitioner allowed bail subject to her furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand) with two sureties in the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.