M. JAVED BUTTAR, J.- The petitioner, Bashir Ahmad alias Touri, is seeking post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 618/1997, dated.
29.10.1997 registered at Police Station Khurrianwala, District Faisalabad for the offences under Sections 302/34, PPC, at the instance of complainant Akbar Ali, for an occurrence of the preceding night in which for persons with muffled faces killed the complainant's brother Muhabat Ali with a fire-arm. The offences under Sections 392/356/109, PPC were added lateron.
2. The petitioner, Bashir Ahmad, and the co-accused Niamat, Salamat Ali and Muhammad Akram were involved in the present case due to the statements of PWs. Muhammad Arshad and Nazir Ahmad recorded by the police under Section 161, Cr.P.C. On 21.1.1998 stating that they had seen the petitioner near the scene, of the crime and due to the statements of PWs Qudrat Ali and Shoukat All under Section 161, Cr.P.C. Recorded by the police on the same date i.e. 21.8.1998 to the effect that they had seen these accused making conspiracy to kill the deceased Muhabat Ali at the Dera of one Sardar Ali. The petitioner was arrested of 19.2.1998. Identification parade was held on 22.2.1998 and the petitioner was identified by PWs. Muhammad Sharif and Mahmood-ul-Hassan.
3. The petitioner's application for the grant of post arrest bail has been dismissed by the Additional Sessions judge, Faisalabad on 29.7.2000. Investigation is complete and the challan has been submitted in Court against the petitioner and co-accused Salamat Ali whereas co-accused Muhammad Akram, Niamat Ali and Murad Ali have been declared innocent and have not been challaned. The police has also incorporated three other accused in this case namely Ashfaq, Pervaiz and Ali Sher and they are absconding.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and have also seen the record.
5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to the grant of bail on merits as well as on statutory ground as provided in Section 497(1 )(b), Cr.P.C., the petitioner is not named in the FIR, ho specific role has been attributed to the petitioner, no, material exists on the record connecting the petitioner with the commission of the offence, the so- called*identification parade is inconsequential because the so-called PWs namely Muhammad Ashraf and Mahmood-ul-Hassan who allegedly identified the petitioner are neither the complainant nor the eyewitnesses named in the FIR who saw the occurrence, the petitioner is not a previous convict, he is behind the bars for the last more than two and a half years and the Statutory period of two years has expired and the trial has not yet even commenced, even complete challan has not been submitted so far and the delay in the Commencement and conclusion of the trial is not attributable to the petitioner. The. Contentions have been opposed by the learned counsel for the State and it . Has been submitted that the petitioner has been found guilty in the investigation and, therefore, he is not entitled to the grant of bail.
6. The petitioner is not nominated in the FIR. The complainant and the eye-witnesses of the occurrence were not associated in the investigation parade. There is no material available on the record connecting the petitioner directly with the commission of the offences and even otherwise, the petitioner is entitled to the grant of bail on statutory ground also as the trial has not concluded within the period of two years.
7. In view of the above-mentioned, the application is allowed and the petitioner is granted bail subject to his famishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 100,000/- (Rupees one lac only) with one surety, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of Trial Court.