ATTA-UR-RAHMAN, J.- This is an application field by Asghar Ali Khakhrani s/o Ballach Khan who is involved in Crime No. 37/2000, Police Station Ketty Mumtaz under Section 302, P.P.C.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case as enunciated in the F.I.R, are that on 25.12.2000 at 0700 hours complainant namely Ali Hasan lodged report alleging therein that on the fateful night he (complainant), P.Ws. Hatirh, Din Muhammad, Asghar Ali and Arbab Ali along with other family members went to sleep in their home, when about 2:30 a.m. (night) there raised cries of "murder- murder" towards the room of Adam Khan Khakhrani to which complainant and PWs Hatim and Din Muhammad went running there and saw on the bulb light, accused Asghar Ali who inflicting sharp side hatchet blows to deceased Shahzado and Mst. Darya Khatoon who were fallen on the ground and they died within their sight. On query accused Asghar Ali disclosed complainant and P.Ws, that he has murdered both deceased on account of grave and sudden provocation while selling them on objectionable position and thereafter accused went out of his home along with his hatchet. The complainant and P.Ws, observed blows at the head neck and other parts of bodies of both deceased. Later on due to the odd hours of the night complainant remained there and in the morning he went to lodge such report. Hence this bail application.
3. Learned counsel for applicant has filed affidavits of Ali Hassan who is complainant and eye- witnesses Din Muhammad. Muhammad Hatim and Dad Muhammad. They are present in Court. All these persons in their affidavits have categorically stated that they had not seen the incident. They further stated that they have not seen any body committing murders of Shahzado and Mst. Darya Khatoon.
4. It appears that the eye-witnesses are not supporting the case of the prosecution, In this situation it will not be fair to refuse the bail to the present applicant therefore, he is allowed bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.200,000/- and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
5. During the hearing it was found that the complainant in his F.I.R, has disclosed apart of himself Hatim, Deen Muhammad and one Arbab Ali father of the deceased Shahzado was also present in the house, It is strange that Arbab Ali who is father of other deceased was not shown in the challan.
To clarify this Investigating Officer Muhammad Meeral was summoned in Court and was questioned as to what proceedings has taken to join Arbab Ali in the investigation. He was given time to examine the police papers and he made statement that he had not made any effort to contact Arbab Ali or examine him in this case as witness. He further submitted that he merely relied upon the statement of the complainant and proceeded accordingly.
This goes to show that the police officer had not performed his duty as required by law. It further shows as police officer he failed to investigate the case thoroughly by joining of the concerned persons. The conduct of the Investigating Officer shows that he is incompetent and also responsible for dereliction of his lawful duty.
In the circumstances, a copy of this order be communicated to the S.S.P. Larkana for enquiry into the matter and take appropriate action against the police officer.