This order will dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous No.168-B of 2003 filed by Ghulam Mustafa seeking pre-arrest bail Criminal Miscellaneous No.191-B of 2003 filed by Khadim Hussain for post-arrest bail as both arise out of case F.I.R. No.413 of 2002 registered on 25-10-2002 under sections 302/324/109, P.P.C. At Police Station City Burewala, District Vehari.
2. The brief allegation in the F.I.R. Is that Zafar Imran deceased son of the complainant was married in October, 2002 with Mst. Shahnaz Begum daughter of complainant's brother and after about one month of this marriage the deceased contracted marriage with Mst. Kubra daughter of Nazir Ahmed against the wishes of complainant after abducting her. After two months of this marriage, he came back and started residing with the complainant. On 24th of October, 2002 Ghulam Murtaza accused came to the house of the complainant and invited Zafar Imran and his were Mst.
Kubra at Four-Way Hotel. At about 6-30 p.m. Zafar Imran and Mst. Kubra were going on a motorcycle while the complainant alongwith his brother Mushtaq Ahmad and one Abdul Ghani were going behind them as they had to go to Ghalla Mandi. When Zafar Imran and his were reached near, Ginning Factory BTM Ghulam Murtaza asked them to stop who stopped the motorcycle and came down from it. Ghulam Murtaza gave a number of fire-arm injuries on different parts of the body of Imran and Mst. Kubra thereafter he ran away on the motorcycle. The motive of the occurrence is the marriage of Zafar Imran without the consent of the parents of Mst.
Kubra Imran and her subsequent abduction by him and the occurrence took place at the abetment of Nazir Ahmad and Ghulam Mustafa father and brother of Ghulam Murtaza main accused.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that both the petitioners have been involved in the present case with mala fide intention and ulterior motives being relatives of the main accused Ghulam Murtaza and they were neither present at the spot at the time of occurrence nor caused any injury to the deceased. It is further contended that the witnesses before whom the conspiracy was hatched also do not find mention in the F.I.R., but subsequently, the story has been concocted and two witnesses have been introduced by the prosecution in order to fill up the lacunas in the prosecution's case, hence, it is a fit case for the grant of bail before arrest to Ghulam Mustafa and bail after arrest to Khadim Hussain. Further contends that case falls within the purview of further inquiry.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant opposes this application on the ground that bail before arrest is meant, if involvement of the accused is due to mala fide or ulterior motive and there is no such motive on the part of the prosecution, hence, Ghulam Mustafa is not entitled to the extraordinary relief by this Court. It is also contended that two independent witnesses have also supported the prosecution case. It is further contended that the petitioners are involved in a case falling within the prohibitory clause and thus are not entitled to the grant of bail before arrest or even bail after arrest, respectively. It is also contended that factum of relationship with the main accused is also a corroborative circumstance against the petitioners for the involvement and hatching conspiracies for the commissions of offence.
5. Learned counsel for the State also opposes these applications on different grounds.
6. I have heard all the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record. It is an admitted fact that neither Ghulam Mustafa nor Khadim Hussain were present at the spot at the time of occurrence nor they are attributed any injury to the deceased or injured P.W. Mst. Kubra, though the name of Ghulam Mustafa alongwith Nazir Ahmad is mentioned in the F.1 R. That the occurrence had taken place at their abetment yet no detail of hatching conspiracy by them is mentioned alongwith the names of the witnesses before whom conspiracy was hatched but subsequently, the names of the witnesses have been introduced. The contents of the F.I.R. Show that the complainant was not aware of any conspiracy being hatched for the murder of the deceased, otherwise he would have made preventive steps to save the life of his son. Prima facie the story of conspiracy seems to be an afterthought in order to widen the net by the complainant party to involve maximum persons from the accused party. The possibility of false implication of the petitioners being real brother and real uncle of the main accused, cannot be ruled out. I find that pre-arrest bail is meant to protect the innocent citizens, if have been found involved with mala fide intention.
In these circumstances the case of the petitioners is that of further inquiry.
Hence, both these petitions (Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 168-B and 191-B of 2003) are allowed and an interim pre-arrest bail beady granted to Ghulam Mustafa petitioner vide order dated 23-1-2003 is hereby confirmed and Khadim Hussain is allowed post-arrest bail, subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000 (rupees one lac only) each with two sureties each in he like amount to the satisfaction of the earned Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate.
7. It is, however, clarified that the observations made in this order are of tentative assessment and will not prejudice the case of either party at the trial.