1. ' By an order, dated 28-12-2001, the applicants were granted interim pre-arrest bail in application of their arrest which is fixed for confirmation or otherwise.
2. ' The prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R. Is that on 7-10-2001 at 5-00 p.m., complainant Shah Murad appeared at Dodapur Police Station, District Jacobabad and lodged F.I.R. Alleging inter alia that 4/5 months prior to this incident at noon time the complainant and his brother Kandoo aged about 33/34 years and other brothers Kewal and Zulfiqar came to Dodapur Town for fetching work and after doing so when they were returning back to their house on donkey cart and at about 6-00 p.m. When they reached Bakejo Wah, six persons were standing there. They were (1) Nizamuddin,
(2) Mahhakumuddin, (3) Shamsuddin alias Shamoo all the three sons of Gulzar, (4) Bachal son of Muhammad Umar, (5) Jumo son of Arz Muhammad alias Arzi and (6) Bangal son of Saifal Bathoar were standing there. Nizamuddin told Kandoo the brother of complainant that he should come down from the donkey cart and was asked to go to their house. He stayed for a night there. The complainant party waited for sufficient time but he could not return in the morning the complainant alongwith his brothers went to Nazamuddin and required about his brother Kandoo who disclosed that they have already left him last night. The complainant went in search of Kandoo but could not get any clue. It has been alleged in the F.I.R. That they had suspicion in Nazamuddin and others. In the morning complainant his brother Kewal (2) Zulfiqar, (3) Fazuluddin,
(4) Muhammad Hussain son of Shamurad and (5) Ashique son of Kewal Khatoher approached Mahhakumuddin and enquired from them on Holy Qur'an on which they disclosed that Kandoo was their thief who had been killed and his dead body is untraceable. The complainant ultimately approached the police wherein F.I.R. Was lodged against the abovementioned six persons. The motive disclosed in the F.I.R. Is that a year prior to the registration of F.I.R. The goats of Nazimuddin were stolen for which Kandoo and others were suspected. The investigation followed and in due course the applicants have been sent up to stand trial in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jacobabad.
3. ' I have heard to Mr. Muhammad Ayaz Soomro learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Sher Muhammad Shar learned Assistant Advocate-General for the State and perused the record.
4. ' It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the case against his clients is false who have been implicated in this case due to enmity and suspicion. It has further been contended that the F.I.R. Is belated by 4/5 months inasmuch as the incident has taken place 4/5 months prior to the registration of F.I.R. Whereas the report has been lodged on 7-10-2001 but no satisfactory explanation has been given in the. F.I.R. The perusal of F.I.R. Shows that it is quite and unwitnessed crime. It has also been argued by the learned counsel that the only evidence against applicants is the evidence of last seen couple with the extra-judicial confession which of course are weak pieces of evidence. Learned counsel has referred to the case of Rafique Ahmed and others v. The State 1984 M LD 1411 and Haji Taj Muhammad v. The State 1992 PCr.LJ 2125 in supports of his contentions.
5. ' Mr. Sher Muhammad Shar, learned Assistant Advocate-General for the State conceded to the above legal position and raised no objection if the interim pre-arrest bail granted earlier is confirmed.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties and have come across the police file which shows that admittedly the F.I.R.
7. Belated by 4/5 months and no satisfactory explanation is forthcoming. There is no eye-witness to the occurrence who could have actually seen the incident. The dead body of deceased has not yet been recovered and in the eventuality the offence at the most would fall under section 201, P.P.C.
8. Which is punishable up to seven years and the same goes out of the prohibition as contained in section 497(1), Cr.P.C. In the circumstances, the interim pre-arrest bail granted earlier to the applicants by an order dated 28-12-2001 is confirming on the same terms and conditions. Criminal Bail Application No,904 of 2001 stands disposed of.
9. ' Muhammad Panah who has stood surety on behalf of the applicants is before this Court and makes statement that he is going to withdraw as surety. The request is granted and he is absolved to stand as surety. Learned counsel makes statement on behalf of the applicants that another surety is available. In the circumstances, he is directed to appear in the office and stand as fresh surety on behalf of the applicants.