' Petitioners through this application have sought post-arrest bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No, 184 of 1997, dated 6-7-1997 under section 302/324/452/170/171/148/149/109, P.P.C. At Police Station Luddon, District Vehari.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that the aforestated F.I.R. Was recorded on the statement of Saif Ullah with the allegation that he noticed firing in the house of Nazar Hussain where two unknown persons wearing uniform were killed.
3. Learned counsel has sought bail on the ground that the petitioners have not been mentioned in the F.I.R. And they have been implicated in a mala fide manner. A further argument had been advanced that the co-accused Feroze and Muhammad Afzal having similar role have already been released on bail by this Court vide Criminal Miscellaneous No . 1057/B of 1998.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned Law Officer have opposed the grant of bail. He has pointed out that the petitioners have been found implicated after thorough investigation and challan has already been submitted against them. It has further been pointed out that incriminating weapons during the course of investigations have also been recovered from the petitioners except Muhammad Ikram petitioner No,4.
5. I have considered the contentions. The case of the petitioners Nos.1 to 3 is totally different from that of Feroze Din and Muhammad Afzal who were released on bail earlier by this Court. No recovery whatsoever was effected from them nor any motive was ascribed to them. However, it is admitted before me that from first three petitioners namely Muhammad Yar, Muhammad Hussain and Ghulam Farid, .12 bore guns and 7 mm rifles were recovered from them during the course of investigations. Further during the course of investigation they have been found fully implicated and challan has already been submitted respecting them before the Court of competent jurisdiction.
As far as petitioner No,4 Muhammad Ikram is concerned his case is distinguishable as no recovery whatsoever was effected from him nor any role has been attributed to him. In this background, except Muhammad Ikram petitioner No,4, I am not inclined to extend the concession of bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, bail plea qua petitioners Nos.1 to 3 is rejected and Muhammad Ikram petitioner No,4 is admitted to bail provided the furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs,one lac with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate concerned.