On 9-11-1998 one Ghulam Hussain laid information at Police Station Kot Mubarak, District D.G. Khan that his father Muhammad Yousaf, alongwith his mother and sister are residing in Basti Talai, village Jiani while he is residing elsewhere. He received information in the morning that his father has been murdered. He reached the said village and his mother told him that Muhammad Yousaf after taking his dinner left the house saying that he is going to meet his nephew. Fazal Imrani who did not return till the morning when a search was made and his dead body was found in front of house of the one Allah Bakhsh. There was a gun fire wound on the left bicep and signs of stick blows on his chin and hand; that he suspected that his father has been murdered by Ibrahim, Ismail and Hassan sons of Gul Muhammad as Ibrahim had suspected that some illicit liaison is being maintained by his wife with the deceased. On the said information a case under section 302/109/34, P.P.C. Was registered vide F.I.R. No,186, dated 9-11-1998 at Police Station Kot Mubarak, District D.G. Khan. It appears that investigation took many turns and it was on 21-2-1999 that the present petitioner was arrested and according to the pollee led to the recovery of gun allegedly used in the offence. A bail application filed by the petitioner was heard by leaned Sessions Judge, D.G. Khan who dismissed the same on 12-10-1999.
2. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has been falsely roped in. There is no evidence against him except an extra judicial confession. Learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.
3. I have gone through the record brought by the Police Officer. I find that according to the Zimni recorded on 17-1-1999 i,e, more than two months after registration of the case one Fazal son of Faqira gave a statement that he alongwith Ghulam Hussain were coming on a motor-cycle on 8- 11-1998 (i,e, the day of alleged occurrence) when he heard a gun shot. When he turned his motor- cycle towards the said noise they met Mewa son of Ahmad who was holding a stick in his hand and the petitioner who was carrying a rifle and when he inquired about the noise of the gun shot Mewa said that Muhammad Yousaf used to pester his sister Halima for illicit intercourse and she complained to him. He tried to stop Yousaf but he continued. Consequently, he told his sister that she should ask Yousaf to meet him at a certain time when she conveyed the said message to Yousaf she informed him as well and thus they sat in ambush and when Yousaf came killed him.
4. Without commenting upon the correctness of the said statement this Fazal appears to be the same person who is mentioned in the FIR i,e, the nephew of the deceased. Prima facie it is unbelievable that when Fazal was aware of the facts on the very day rather at the time of occurrence why did not he come out with the said information and why did not he informed his aunt i,e, wife of the deceased who according to the contents of the F.I.R. Had been looking for her husband and it was only in the morning that his body was discovered. So far as the recovery of the gun is concerned it is the contention of the learned counsel that the gun is a licensed weapon belonging to an uncle of the petitioner and as recovered from his house and the witness of the memo. Is no person other than the said nephew of the deceased. I also find that the persons initially named in the F.I.R. Have since been found to be innocent and so is the case with another set of persons who were named thereafter. So far as the said extra judicial confession is concerned the same has always been treated a very weak type of evidence. Reference be made to the case of Amir Hamza v. The State 1988 .SCMR 755. The Police Officer present, informs that no empties were recovered from the spot where the deceased is stated to have been killed. At the moment it cannot be said with certainty as to whether the gun allegedly recovered at the pointation of the petitioner was used in the commission of the offence. I certainly find it to be a case of further inquiry. The petitioner was arrested on 21-2-1999 and was sent to judicial lockup on 25-2-1999 and is so incarcerated eversince. I accordingly allow this Criminal Miscellaneous and admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
5. Record be returned to the Police Officer.