' Muhammad Hamid brother of Mst. Rifat Yasmeen had taken a written report to Police Station Kotwali, Peshawar and stated therein that he was informed at Jamrud Road on telephone that one woman and three persons have entered the house of Mst. Rifat with the intention of committing theft etc. And that before they could succeed, on the hue and cries raised by his sister people of the locality overpowered and arrested two male accused whose names later transpired to be Zahid Latif (the petitioner), Khawas and Mst. Nasreen alias Shazia. A case was, therefore, registered against the present petitioner along with his co-accused.
2. Bail has been refused to the petitioner mainly on the ground that he as well as his co-accused, named above, not only were arrested on the spot but have made judicial confessions. Bail was also refused on the ground that the three assailants accused including the petitioner stand identified by name and that no formal test identification parade was necessitated.
3. Learned counsel for the State Mr. Amir Zaib vehemently opposed the grant of bail and submitted that the accused-petitioner has made the confession and has also been implicated in the crime in the statement of his two co-accused who have also confessed. The complainant of the case Muhammad Hamid is though served but not present.
4. I have gone through the record and have perused the two confessions with that of the petitioner.
The three confessions as tentatively adjudged does not seem to be confession in true sense because none of the confessor has accepted any criminal act unto himself, more particularly the present petitioner. Instantly, I will confine my observations to the confession of the present petitioner wherein he has stated that Mst. Nasreen had asked him to accompany her to the house of crime without disclosing the purpose. In this view of the matter when no actual offence seems to have been committed and at best there is an unlawful entry into the house and when it is yet to be decided if the petitioner entered the house with criminal intent, it will be rather appropriate to extend the benefit of further inquiry in the matter to the petitioner. This bail application is, therefore, allowed provided the petitioner furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate.
' My above observations in respect of confession of the petitioner or for that matter co-accused who are not before me are just tentative and shall not have any bearing on the case of the prosecution at trial.