Abdul Ghafoor petitioner who is involved in a case under sections 302 and 364, P. P. C. Has moved this petition for bail. The F. I. R. Was lodged by Inayat Ullah on 7th July, 1977 wherein he alleged that his wife Mst. Sughra had developed illicit relations with Abdul Ghafoor petitioner and that on 23rd June, 1977 when he was away to Sialkot the petitioner took away Mgt. Sughran and his two years old son Muhammad Azim. He expressed apprehension that the petitioner and Mst. Sughran would kill Muhammad Azeem. Later on Mst. Sughran made a statement before a Magistrate that the petitioner had thrown Muhammad Azim in the Upper Chenab Canal upon which section 302, P. P. C.
Was also added.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the F.I.R. Was lodged about fifteen days after the occurrence and the evidence collected by the Investigating Agency does not connect the petitioner with the commission of offence, therefore, he is entitled to the concession of bail.
3. The case was initially registered under section 364, P. P. C. The delay in reporting the occurrence has been explained by the complainant in the F. I. R. Saving that he had been searching for his wife and son. According to the F. I. R. The deceased was last seen in the company of the petitioner by as many as four witnesses, namely, Faqir Muhammad, Lal Din, Muhammad Ali and Nazir Ahmad and thereafter he was never seen. Then there is the statement of Mst. Sughran implicating herself as well as the petitioner in the commission of the offence of murder. In the circumstances I see no ground for the petitioner's enlargement on bail at this stage and his application is dismissed.