' Mst. Nargis Bibi deceased of this case was the wife of Nazir Ahmad, a son of Nizam Din. The aforesaid Nizam Din made sale of some landed property and his son Nazir Ahmad as well as Mst.
Nargis Bibi demanded their share from the sale price. Nizam Din did not agree to that and was annoyed due to that. On 19-11-1997 Mst. Nargis Bibi was arriving back to her home after leaving the kids in a school where they were studying. She reached near the shop of Abdul Ghani Rehmani where Muhammad Azam was standing while armed with a pistol alongwith Munir Ahmad petitioner-accused and his father Nizam Din, both empty-handed. Nizam Din is said to have made the commanding Lalkara by addressing his sons Muhammad Azam and Munir Ahmad to get hold of Mst. Nargis Bibi and to murder her who always demanded the share from sale price of the land.
Munir Ahmad petitioner-accused is alleged to have restrained Mst. Nargis Bibi while Muhammad Azam co-accused effected firing upon her. Two fire shots hit the chest of Mst. Nargis Bibi who fell down. Thereafter, Muhammad Azam further fired at her which hit her back. Naseeb Ali father of Mst.
Nargis Bibi, Bashir Ahmad and Dost Muhammad are said to have seen' the occurrence who were going to contact Nizam Din to settle the matter. About the aforesaid occurrence F.I.R. No,848, dated 19-11-1997 was registered at Police Station Factory Area, District Sheikhupura under section 302/34, of the Pakistan Penal Code. Munir Ahmad petitioner was arrested on 29-11-1997 whose bail plea has been rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozewala, District Sheikhupura with the reasoning that Munir Ahmad petitioner is said to have restrained Mst. Nargis Bibi whose presence at the spot is prima facie made out and that even if the police has declared him as innocent, the said opinion is not binding upon the Court. Munir Ahmad petitioner has filed this petition before this Court to try his luck to be admitted to bail.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for Munir Ahmad petitioner-accused as well the learned State Counsel and gone through the record before me. The contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner are that Munir Ahmad petitioner did not injure Mst. Nargis Bibi who is said to have restrained her and that he has been involved to put the pressure upon the family He added that the story projected by the police is unnatural as the chance of hitting and injuring Munir Ahmad petitioner-accused cannot be ruled out. He also referred to the opinion of the police whereby Munir Ahmad petitioner has been declared as innocent. On the contrary learned counsel for the State laid the emphasis that the recitals of the F.I.R. Have made out the presence of Munir Ahmad petitioner at the spot and that the Courts are not bound by the opinion of the police about the innocence of the accused. At the very outset I would express that it is the admitted position that during the investigation Munir Ahmad petitioner has been declared as innocent who has been mentioned in Column No,2 of the challan indictment and has been placed at the mercy of the Court. My view is that due to the role attributed to Munir Ahmad petitioner the aforesaid opinion expressed by the Investigating Officer is entitled to due weight and merits to be relied upon even at this initial stage for the purpose of acceptance of this bail application. The fact of the matter is that Munir Ahmad petitioner-accused did not injure Mst. Nargis Bibi deceased as well as the prosecution witnesses. He is said to have restrained Mst. Nargis Bibi. The assertion raised by the learned counsel for Munir Ahmad petitioner that the chance that Munir Ahmad petitioner would have been hit and injured in case the story mentioned in the F.I.R. Is given the weight has the merit and cannot be ignored especially when at the initial time with the firing effected by the principal accused Muhammad Azam two shots are said to have hit the chest of Mst. Nargis Bibi who fell down and thereafter due to the firing of Muhammad Azam co-accused she received the injuries on her back. It is not a case of one shot only. When there are more than one shots, it can be imagined that the assailant was bent upon to succeed in his enterprise and obviously his co-accused as in the instant case, would not entrap himself by putting his own life in danger. I would be glossing over an important aspect of the alleged type of matter by expressing that the victim would struggle to get herself freed and saved and in that process an accused of the category of Munir Ahmad can also receive the injury who obviously would not facilitate his co-accused as mentioned in the F.I.R. This is the crux of the matter to make me hold that the involvement of Munir Ahmad petitioner is a question of further enquiry who, as such, is entitled to be admitted to bail. I, therefore, hold that it is a fit case to admit Munir Ahmad petitioner to bail than to let him to remain in jail.
3. For what has been said above, I accept this application and admit Munir Ahmad petitioner to bail in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge,. Ferozewala, District Sheikhupura with a direction to appear before the learned trial Court on every date of hearing failing which the learned trial Court may cancel his bail.
4. Copy Dasti.