' ABDUR RAUF KHAN LUGHMANI, J.--- One Baitullah, on 5-8-1997, at about 9-00 a.m., made report, recorded in the shape of Murasila, to the effect that he, alongwith Sahidullah, was busy in irrigation of his land and in that process, when they reached Kacha Road near Village Zarak Mamakhel, they , noticed Ghulam Jan alias Jajan, Attaullah son of Sher Ali, Qismatullah son of Tore Ali alias Tore, Hakeem Khan alias Hakeemi son of Shahbas Khan, sitting duly armed with kalashnikovs. Reaching near them, Ghulam Jan and Attaullah caught hold of Shahidullah and forced him to proceed with them, while Nematullah and Hakeem Khan threatened him with dire consequences. Ghulam Jan and Attaullah took Shahidullah close to the shop of Maizer Ali and fired at him, with which he fell down. Nematullah and Hakeem Khan also fired at him (complainant) but he was lucky to escape.
The motive is stated to be a dispute over land and previous firing.
2. After necessary investigation, challan under section 512, Cr.P.C. Was submitted to the Special Court, as all the four accused were absconding. The Special Court proceeded with the case on 4- 3-1998. It appears that one Sher Bali Khan had submitted an ,application in November, 1997 to the Deputy Inspector-General of Police for re-investigation of the case on the ground that the accused Ghulam Jan and Hakeem Khan were not involved in the crime, having gone to the area of Wazirs a month before to avoid their arrest under section 302/324, P.P.C. In which they were proclaimed offenders. The application was simply marked to the D.S.P. City for necessary action. Accused Ghulam Jan and Hakeem Khan through Sherbali Khan submitted another application to the D.I.-G., Bannu, who on 9-3-1998 marked it to the D.S.P., City for enquiry And report. It was alleged in this application that they were ready to produce 20/30 persons in support of their innocence. The D.S.P.
Examined about 15 persons and submitted enquiry report in favors of the two accused. The Investigating Officer took bonds for appearance from accused Ghulam Jan in terms of section 169, Cr.P.C. And submitted another challan, wherein name of Ghulam Jan was placed in Column No,2.
On 21-9-1998, the learned Special Court, Bannu took the accused into custody. Feeling aggrieved, he had approached this Court for his release on bail.
3. The main grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the learned trial Judge in slipshod manner, without applying his mind to the case, took the petitioner into custody, meaning thereby cancellation of his bail.
4. The petitioner was released on his personal bond under section 169, Cr.P.C. And under section 173(3), Cr.P.C. The trial Judge is competent to make such order for the discharge of such bond or otherwise as he thinks so. It is evident from the order sheet, dated 21-9-1998, that the petitioner was present as he was summoned pursuant to application for taking cognizance of case against him.
Another challan was submitted by the prosecuting agency which was treated as supplementary challan. The trial Judge did observe that he was charged in F.I.R. For the murder of Shahidullah by the complainant who was injured in the same incident. It is also in the order that after going through the available record, including F.I.R. And the site plan etc. He took cognizance and directed that the petitioner be taken into custody.
5. We find that petitioner and his companions have been charged in the F.I.R. For firing with kalashnikovs from a close range resulting in the death of Shahidullah. The complainant did state that the accused party also fired at him with which he was hit. The petitioner remained an outlaw, for which no plausible explanation has been offered.
6. The application is without any merits and is dismissed. However, the , trial Court is directed to complete the trial within a period of two months positively under intimation to the Additional Registrar of this Court.