1. ' The applicant was arrested on 28-9-1977 by Federal Investigation Agency, Hyderabad, in connection with alleged murder of one Fakir Mohammad Amin which was said to have been committed four years ago. The P. I. R. Was registered on 10-8-1977 on the complaint of Mir Khan brother of the deceased Fakir Mohammad Amin made to the Martial Law Administrator, Zone 'C'
2. Karachi. The P. L R. Does not mention the name of applicant and is on the whole, general in terms reporting as it does only of the killing of Fakir Mohammad Amin by Sanghar Police with the active support of Fatah Mohammad Memon formes Deputy Commissioner of Khairpur, Muhammad Khan Junjo, former Home Secretary Government of Sind and Jam Sadik, former Minister of Government of Sind. In the complaint it was also that in addition to the aforesaid persons, the complainant had mentioned names of some other persors also in the High Court. It is admitted before me that the name of the applicant did not appear even in the Constitutional Petition No, 1054/73 which was filed in this Court on 12-7-1973 by the complainant Mir Khan.
3. ' The applicant had earlier moved a bail application on 2-10-1977 before the Sessions Judge, Sanghar which was dismissed on 20-10-1977. 1 have gone through the order of the learned Sessions Judge and apart from recording the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties all he had to say as a ground for rejection of the bail application that the case was still under investigation and he was of the opinion that It was not the stage for grant of bail.
4. ' The prosecution story is that the applicant had brought the deceased Fakir Mohammad Amin from Central Prison; Sukkur, to Sanghar and had made false entries in the relevant log book showing that be had gone on tour to Sanghar District, although he had gone to Khairpur and Sukkur for bringing the deceased to Sanghar. The learnedAdvocate General further stated that according to the prosecution case the applicant had also secured the release of the decease S on a fictitious bond in collusion with Mr. Fateh Mohammad Memon, the then Deputy Commissioner of Kairpur and Mr. Attar the then Additional District Magistrate. The last two persons are reported to have been granted bail by the Sessions Judge, Sanghar.
5. ' Mr. Mohammad Hayat Junejo, learned counsel for the applicant contended that at best it was a case falling under sections 466 and 363, P. P. C. And the offences falling under these sections are punishable with a maximum sentence of seven bears' R. I. According to the learned counsel no material bad been brought on record connecting the applecant with the crime of alleged murder.
6. N, r. Mohammad Hayat Junejo also pointed out to me that on an earlier occasion a bail application in connection with the same offence made by Fakir Mohammad Rabim had come before me and had enlarged him on bail as per order dated 8-11-1977 inter alia on the consideration that Ali Khan Junejo one of the co-accused have moved an application for bail before arrest and this Court had dismissed that application on the statement of the learned Advocate-General that the prosecution did not contemplate the arrest of said Ali Khan Junejo. Mr. Hayat stressed that the name of the applicant is neither mentioned in the F. I. R. Which was lodged after four years, nor was disclosed by the complainant in the constitutional petition referred to a above and in the absence of any evidence directly connecting applicant with the alleged crime there was no case made out under section 302, P. P. C against the applicant who was entitled to grant of bail.
7. ' Mr. Abdul Bakes Lakho, learned Advocate-General states that interim challan has been filed and investigation is still going on but no further evidence has so far been brought against the applicant.
8. The evidence so far recorded therefore prima Jack only connects applicant with the offence under sections 466 and 363, P. P. C. Which punishable with imprisonment for seven years' R.
1. And therefore for the tine being applicant is entitled to bail it would be open to the prosecution apply for canceltation of bail and when some evidence connecting the appli cant with the alleged murder is found against him.
9. ' In the circumstances 1 would direct that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing of one surety in the sum of Rs, 10,000 with P. R. Bond in th like amount to the satidication of the Sessions Judge, Sanghar unless he is required in connection with any other case.