' One Dilshad was gunned down in the District Courts, Faisalabad at about 9-10 a.m. On 7-2-1998.
Vide F.I.R. No,63 recorded on the same day at Police Station Kotwali, Faisalabad complainant Muhammad Gulzar had nominated five persons in connection with that murder. The role attributed to the petitioner, one of the five accused persons, was that he was armed with a pistol and he had fired at Dilshad deceased hitting his left thigh. Tahir alias Babbi co-accused was alleged to have fired at left chest of the deceased whereas Jamal Din co-accused was attributed a fire-arm injury on the abdomen of the deceased. Nasir and Kamal Din co-accused were involved on the basis of an alleged conspiracy/abetment at their instance. Lal Din petitioner in this case was arrested on 7- 2-1998. He applied for his bail after arrest but the same was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad on 25-5-1998. Hence, the present petition before this Court.
2. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the F.I.R. In this case had been lodged with a delay of four hours whereas the occurrence took place within the precincts of the District Courts, Faisalabad where generally a number of police officials are present. It has also been argued that the injury attributed to the petitioner is admittedly on a non-vital part of the deceased and according to the post-mortem examination report that injury did not contribute towards the death of the deceased. It has forcefully been argued by him that the allegation in the F.I.R. Was that the deceased had been fired at when he was face to face with the assailants but the medical evidence shows that all the injuries sustained by the deceased were received by him from the back side. It had been stressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no weapon has been recovered from the petitioner and, therefore, the role attributed to the petitioner does not find any independent corroboration. He has pointed out that during the entire investigation of this case so far not a word has been recorded in the police file about any opinion of the police regarding guilt or innocence of the petitioner. He has maintained that the petitioner's involvement in this case is a result of political pressure on the police and that the whole family of the petitioner has been falsely implicated on the basis of that pressure. Learned counsel has vehemently urged that some independent circumstances cast heavy clouds of doubt on the veracity of the prosecution case. In this respect he has referred to several cuttings from different newspapers of 8-2-1998 wherein the occurrence in question had been reported showing that it was only Tahir alias Babbi accused who had perpetrated this offence all alone and that he had been apprehended at the spot by a police official. In this context learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed on record a photo copy of the log-book maintained at the police wireless station/post, Faisalabad for 7-2-1998 showing receipt of a wireless message disclosing that this offence had been committed by a single accused who had been apprehended by a police constable in plain clothes. The learned counsel has further supported this fact with the help of another document which is an application of a police constable submitted by him before the DIG/SSP, Faisalabad claiming therein that he had apprehended the solitary culprit committing this offence and that on the basis of this act of bravado he should be rewarded. That application also carries endorsement on the same by the S.P., City as well as the D.S.P., City, Faisalabad. In this very connection the learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that about 50 affidavits of respectables of the locality had been produced before the investigating officer of this case wherein the plea of alibi advanced by the petitioner had been supported. It has lastly been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not involved in the motive incident alleged in the present F.I.R. And, therefore, his alleged complicity with his co-accused is a matter of further inquiry. As against that the learned. Counsel for the State has submitted that the investigation in this case is still in progress and the local police is yet to form an opinion about the guilt or innocence of the petitioner as regards the present occurrence.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record I feel that certain aspects of this case stand out significantly. Upon my query regarding the wireless log-book and the application of a police constable claiming reward on the basis of his apprehension of the solitary accused in this case at the spot the learned counsel for the State as well as Muhammad Ikram, ASI, who has brought the record today, have failed to rebut the same. They have only maintained that this aspect of the matter shall be looked into by the Superintendent of Police, City, Faislaabad when he will take up the investigation of this case qua the petitioner It has also not been denied by the State that a number of affidavits were in fact submitted before the investigating officer of this case supporting the plea of alibi of the petitioner. As regards the newspaper cuttings referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner suffice it to say that although wholehearted reliance cannot be placed on such clippings and admissibility thereof shall be determined at the time of the trial yet the fact remains that such newspaper reports were never controverted subsequently by any quarter. It is also surprising to notice that the plea of alibi advanced by the petitioner has not even been investigated so far and it has been conceded before me that no step has been taken in respect of verification of the stand taken by the deponents of those affidavits. It has also not been controverted that the medical evidence shows that the deceased received all his injuries from his back side whereas the F.I.R. Shows those injuries to have been caused from his front. It has also not been contested that the investigating officer has failed to recover any pistol from the petitioner so as to provide corroboration to the ocular account in this case. The admitted delay of four hours in lodging the F.I.R. Also puts me on caution for the reason that although the incident in question admittedly took place within the premises of the District Courts and a police constable is already on record claiming to have apprehended a culprit at the spot yet, despite availability of police officials within those premises or near about, the F.I.R. In this case was lodged after many hours of the incident. Therefore, prima faice, chances of deliberations before registration of the F.I.R. Cannot be ruled out at this stage. It has been conceded before me by 'the State that the police file is completely silent so far about any finding of guilt or otherwise of the petitioner. The occurrence in question took place on 7-2-1998 and the present petitioner was arrested in this connection on 27-2-1998. If in these four months the local police could not find time or opportunity to investigate about the culpability or otherwise of the petitioner then I am not ready to extend to them any further latitude so as to keep the petitioner behind the bars till such time the local police finds it convenient to investigate in this respect. The question of liberty of a citizen, who at this stage of the case is presumed to be innocent, cannot be allowed to be treated so lightly. It is stated at the Bar by the learned counsel for the State that the Superintendent of Police, City, Faisalabad is scheduled to investigate this case on 22-6-1998 and one cannot be sure as to when any definite finding will be arrived at by him in this respect.
4. For what has been stated above, I find that the case of the petitioner squarely attracts the provisions of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. And the same calls for further inquiry into the guilt of the petitioner. Therefore, this petition is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Ilaqa Magistrate.
5. It is, however, clarified that if on the basis of the investigation still to be conducted in this case by the local police a finding is ultimately arrived at holding the petitioner to be guilty in the eyes of the police the State shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail granted to the petitioner by this Court today.