' This order will dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous No,32-B of 1998, filed by Ihsanullah, accused and Criminal Miscellaneous 132-B of 1998 filed by Manzoor Hussain, accused for grant of post-arrest bail in a case registered against them and others vide F.I.R. No,21, dated 4-3-1996 for offence under sections 302/148, 149/109 and 120-B/379 of the P.P.C. At Police Station Head Rajkan, District Bahawalpur.
2. At the time of occurrence Ihsan, petitioner was armed with a .12 bore gun and Manzoor Hussain with klashnikov. They alongwith their co-accused Muhammad Tayyeb armed with repeater .12 bore gun and Zulfiqar and Muhammad Iqbal armed with .222 rifles fired at Asghar Ali, real brother of Akbar Ali, complainant who was critically wounded and then died at the spot.. The occurrence was witnessed by Muhammad Arif, Abdur Rahman and Muhammad Siddiq, apart from Akbar Ali, complainant. After the occurrence Manzoor Hussain, petitioner and Muhammad Iqbal made good their escape alongwith Tariq Ayyub co-accused who was waiting in a car. Ihsan petitioner, Muhammad Tayyeb and Zulfiqar co-accused escaped on the motorcycle of Asghar Ali, deceased while firing in the air.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.A.-G for the State. The occurrence had taken place on 4-3-1996 Ihsanullah, petitioner was arrested on 16-5-1996 and Manzoor petitioner on 17-6-1997. The investigation was initially conducted by Sajjad Haider, S.-I till 15-5-1996 and thereafter by Liiqat Ali, Inspector till 9-12-1996. By that time Ihsanullah, petitioner had been arrested while*Manzoor Hussain, petitioner remained an absconder. As mentioned above Manzoor Hussain, petitioner was arrested on 17-6-1997 and at that time the case was being investigated into by Muhammad Munawar, D.S.P., who held the petitioners to be innocent vide Zimni No,81 dated 22-6-1997. He had joined some shopkeepers of the Adda in the investigation who stated before him that the petitioners were not present at the time of occurrence. Jamaat Ali, A.S.-I also deposed before the Investigating Officer that the petitioners had not participated in the occurrence. The Investigating Officer came to the conclusion that Ihsanullah, Manzoor Hussain, petitioners, Khalid Hussain, Mushtaq Raja, Ashfaq Raja and Tahir Anwar co-accused were innocent.
We refrain from discussing deeper merits of the case including the finding of innocence recorded in favour of the abovementioned accused persons lest it might cause prejudice to them at the trial Suffice it to observe that the petitioners' plea of alibi is oral and was supported by some shop- keepers of the Adda who were interrogated by the Investigating Officer/D.S.P. In May, 1997, more than one year after the occurrence. It cannot be preferred at this stage over the eye-witness account furnished by Akbar Ali, A complainant, Muhammad Arif, Abdur Rahman and Muhammad Siddiq, who in their statements recorded under section 161 of the Cr.P.C. Fully implicated the petitioners and supported the prosecution story narrated in the F.I.R. It is true that the plea of alibi can be considered at the bail stage as held in the case of Ch. Muhammad Shafi v. Ch Muhammad Anwar Samma and another 1975 SCM R 219 and Muhammad Azam v. Khalid Javed Gillan etc. 1981 SCM R 734. However, weight to be given to the plea of alibi at bail stage depends upon the quality of material brought on the record in each case. If the plea of alibi is I promptly raised and is supported by reliable material then it can be safely made basis for grant of bail. In the case of Muhammad Roshan v. Ahmad Khan etc. PU 1974 Cr.Cases, Lahore 185 bail was granted on the basis of a lettter of Major of Pak. Army regarding presence of the accused on duty. In the case of Syed Hamid Raza and 2 others v. The State 1974 PCr.LJ Note 77 at p.47 bail was granted to two accused on their plea of alibi, one of whom was an officer in P.I.A. Who was shown not to be at the place of incident at the time of occurrence and the other, a Medical Officer who was in attendance in the hospital at the relevant time. Their presence at the places of the duty was supported by the documentary evidence and thus considered sufficient for their enlargement on bail. In the case of Muhammad Hussain v. Muhammad Anwar Ahmad Khan and another 1975 SCM R 151 affidavits of 20 Advocates were available to support the plea of alibi of an accused who was granted bail. In the case of Akram Khan v. The State 1978 SCM R 242, certificate showing an accused person to be present on duty in his unit was given weight for granting bail on his plea of alibi. In this case it was held by the Honourable Supreme Court that it was not possible to lay down a rule of thumb in respect of grant of bail on the defence plea of alibi raised during the course of investigation.
4. In the present case, as mentioned above, both the petitioners had absconded after the occurrence. Ihsanullah, petitioner was arrested after about two months and 12 days while Manzoor Hussain, petitioner after about one year C and three months of the occurrence. We are not persuaded to accept their oral plea of alibi, at this stage, for allowing them bail notwithstanding the fact that it had weighed with the investigating officer. It is settled law that the police opinion regarding innocence of an accused is not binding on the Court particularly when it does not seem to be based on any sound material.
5. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed.