' Through this application the petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No,14 of 2001 registered on 12-1-2001 under section 302/34, P.P.C. With Police Station Kunjah, District Gujrat on the complaint of Shabbir Hussain which took place on the same night at 1-30 a.m. According to the complainant they are four brother. On the night of occurrence his elder brothers Nazir went to the adjacent house to asleep with the children as their sister and brother-in-law had gone to Vaneeke Tarar. In the night at about 1-30 a.m. The complainant alongwith his father Ali Sher woke up on hearing noise when came in the courtyard saw in the light of the bulb Zafar Iqbal accused who was armed with. 12 bore gun double barrel was present alongwith two unknown persons armed with fire-arms whom they can identify they were quarrelling with Muhammad Nazir in the room. The complainant stated that in the presence Zafar Iqbal accused while armed with gun fired at Muhammad Nazir deceased hitting him on the left side of his face who fell down and the accused ran away. The motive of the occurrence was alleged that about 2-1/2 years ago the complainant and Zafar Iqbal had some dispute with each other on which Tajmmal Abbas received the injuries and two days ago Muhammad Nazir was threatened by said Zafar Iqbal that they will teach a lesson to him. After the registration of the F.I.R. a supplementary statement according to the police record was recorded on 12-2-2001 in which he took a different stand and stated that actually Nadim Taimoor petitioner had fired at deceased who received the injuries and not from Zafar Iqbal.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in the F.I.R. It has been specifically mentioned that Zafar lqbal alongwith two unknown persons were present in the room of the deceased and he fired a single shot on the deceased hitting him on the left side of his face. He further contends that in the supplementary statement made by the complainant he took a different stand. He further contends that the benefit of doubt must go to the accused at any stage and the changed version of the complainant is sufficient to make out a case of bail after arrest by the petitioner. He further contends that the police has found innocent the petitioner and his case is also of further inquiry.
3. Mr. Ashfaq Ahmad Chaudhry, Advocate, learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail on the ground that the petitioner is involved in a heinous offence which falls within the prohibitory clause and his name on the same day was mentioned in the supplementary statement by the complainant and there is no enmity or grudge to falsely involve the petitioner in this case.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record. The Investigating Officer who is present on my query has affirmed that nothing was recovered from the petitioner during the investigation. He has further stated that the petitioner was declared innocent by the police and has been placed in column No,2 of the challan. Zafar lqbal has also been challaned and placed in column No,2. Divergent statements made by the complainant during investigation firstly he had attributed fatal blow to Zafar Iqbal and has not mentioned the name of the petitioner in the F.I.R. Recorded by him after about two hours of the occurrence. The second version has been given to the police by the complainant in the supplementary statement in which he has stated that the gunshot was fired by the petitioner and which of the two statements of the complainant is correct can only be seen after the recording of the evidence. As the challan has been submitted in the Court the trial Court will come to a conclusion whether the petitioner has fired at the deceased or Zafar Iqbal after the recording of the evidence of the prosecution. For the time being the petitioner has succeeded in making out a case for further inquiry. He has been declared innocent by the police as nothing has been recovered from him and the complainant has not mentioned his name in the first statement made to the police under section 154, Cr.P.C. Even after the arrest of the petitioner no identification parade was arranged for the identification of the petitioner by the police. The petitioner's case due to the abovesaid circumstances is of further inquiry and he is entitled to grant of bail.
5. This application is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bail after arrest subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (Rupees two lacs only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.