1. Ghulam Rasool complainant got recorded F.I.R. No,59, dated 13-1-1995 at Police Station Malakwal, District Mandi Baha-ud-Din under section 302/452/34, P.P.C. with the allegation that on the mid- night falling between 30/31-1-1995 Abdul Haq petitioner-accused armed with 12 bore gun in the company of his co-accused Zafar armed with 7 MM rifle, Ghulam Nabi armed with hockey and Khizar Hayat empty handed knocked the door of the 'Baithak' which was opened who trespassed the same and that within his sight Abdul Haq petitioner-accused fire at his .son Mukhtar Ahmad which hit his neck and crossed through and through. At that time a guest named as Jan Muhammad was also present in the 'Baithak'. His alarm attracted Khizar Hayat and Allah Bakhsh who saw the accused persons running from the spot. Mukhtar Ahmad died there and then. It is proper to express that Mukhtar Ahmad was an Army Jawan and was availing two rhonths leave.
2. Abdul Haq petitioner-accused was arrested whose bail plea has been rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi Baha-ud-Din and he has filed this petition with the same desire.
2. 3.I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned State counsel and gone through the record before me. The contentions of the learned counsel for Abdul Haq petitioner are that in two investigations he has been declared as innocent by two D.S.Ps., that Khizar Hayat co- accused has been held to be the assailant and that the co-accused Zafar and Ghulam Nabi have been got discharged. He added that the involvement of Abdul Haq petitioner-accused is a question of further inquiry. I do not agree with him. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the State Abdul Haq petitioner is the principal accused as he allegedly fired at Mukhtar Ahmad deceased and was the only person having used the firearm at the relevant time of the occurrence.
3. Zafar and Ghulam Nabi co-accused are stated to have been got discharged while Khizar Hayat co-accused has been admitted to bail. In view of the role attributed to Abdul Haq petitioner- accused who practically is alleged to have committed the murder of Mukhtar Ahmad deceased it can safely be held that he is prima faice liable for the murder of Mukhtar Ahmad deceased who is not entitled to the benefit of rule of consistency as the case of the prosecution against him falls within the prohibitory clause.
4. 4.At this stage I tempted to express that during the arguments it was brought to the notice of this Court that two D.S.Ps. declared Abdul Haq petitioner as innocent. The present texture of the working of the police and the experience shows that the accused persons are declared innocent whenever the investigation is transferred from the local police to a superior Police Officer and it is the high time that the frequent transfer of investigations is avoided and checked and that the superior Police Officers refrain from taking the undue advantage of their status and position in the matter of grant of wrongful gain to the accused persons and wrongful loss to the complainant party. It is a matter of common knowledge that the initial investigation conducted at the level of the Station House Officer of the concerned Police Station is mostly a source of better results about, the administration of justice to reach at the right conclusion and whenever the matter is transferred to the higher Police Officer the tables are turned in majority of cases. As such the opinion about the innocence of Abdul Haq petitioner-accused, keeping in view the material collected by the police at the initial stage, can be termed to be of no legal value and not binding on the Court. Hence it follows that the true picutre shall emerge after the conclusion of the trial.
5. 5.For what has been said above, it is not a case for the admission of Abdul Haq petitioner to bail and I dismiss this petition.