Shah Behram vs State

2014 P Cr. L J 226

[Peshawar]

Before Lal Jan Khattak, J

SHAH BEHRAM---Petitioner

Versus

The STATE and another---Respondents

Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Petition No.94 of 2013, decided on 6th May, 2013.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---

----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302---Qatl-e-amd---Bail, grant of---Recovery of weapon---Matching of crime empty---Evidence, tentative assessment of---Police was informed by complainant of case on spot who chased accused and arrested one of them while the other ran away---Arrested accused disclosed name of other accused to police and on his arrest pistol was recovered by police which was taken into possession---Crime empty recovered from spot by police and pistol recovered from accused were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory---Report of Laboratory showed that empty was fired from the pistol recovered from possession of accused--- Two constables who chased accused also recovered motor cycle from the possession of accused colour and registration number of which were the same given by complainant in F.I.R.--- Tentatively accused was reasonably connected with commission of offence which fell within the restrictive clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.---Bail petition was dismissed in circumstances.

Saif-ur-Rehman Khan for Petitioner.

Sanaullah Khan Shamim, D.A.-G. for the State.

Muhammad Abdullah Baloch and Sh. Imran Ullah for the Complainant.

Date of hearing: 6th May, 2013.

JUDGMENT

LAL JAN KHATTAK, J.---Through the instant criminal miscellaneous bail petition, petitioner Shah Behram seeks his release on bail in case F.I.R. No.113 dated 15-3-2013 registered against him, and his co-accused Mushtaq under section 302/34, P.P.C. at Police Station SMA, Tank.

2.Relevant but short facts of the case are that one Saifur Rehman on 15-3-2013 brought dead body of Jehanzeb to civil hospital, Tank and reported there to Ameer Abdullah SHO PS SMA, Tank to the effect that the deceased is his cousin who was shifted to Tank from D.I. Khan sometime ago. He and the deceased both jointly run mutton and beaf shop, that early in the morning he was present in his shop with Jehanzeb when two persons came riding on a CD-70 motorcycle. One of them took out a pistol of .30 bore and fired at Jehanzeb with which Jehanzeb was hit and critically injured, whereafter both the accused decamped from the scene. He informed two police constables who were on patrol duty near Daman Hotel about the occurrence who chased the accused and arrested one of them who disclosed his name as Shah Behram while the other made his escape good. So a case was registered against them as mentioned above.

3.Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that case against the accused-petitioner is highly doubtful, that it is not ascertainable who fired the fatal shot on the deceased. He further submitted that medical evidence negates ocular version, that there are contradictions in the statement of the P.Ws. and that the site plan also presents a different outlook. He prayed for bail to the petitioner.

4.As against the above, learned counsel for the complainant and learned D.A.-G. opposed the grant of bail to the accused on the ground that, prima facie, there are reasonable grounds to believe that he is connected with the commission of an offence which entails a punishment of death.

5.I have heard learned counsel for parties and gone through the record carefully.

6.The local police which was informed by the complainant of the case on the spot chased the accused on motorcycle and arrested one of them while the other ran away. The arrested accused disclosed his name to the police men as Shah Behram and on arrest, from his custody the local police recovered a pistol which was taken into possession by the said police constables. From the spot the local police also recovered one empty of .30 bore. This empty and the pistol which was recovered from the possession of the accused were sent by the police to FSL. The report of FSL shows that the empty is fired from the pistol recovered from possession of the accused. Apart from the above, the two constables who chased the accused also recovered motorcycle from possession of the accused Shah Behram which colour and registration number are same which were given by the complainant in the F.I.R.

7.All these factors if tentatively assessed together, would lead this Court to believe that the

accused is reasonably connected with the commission of the offence. Apart from the above, investigation in the case is complete and challan has been forwarded to the prosecution for its putting into Court.

8.View from the above, tentatively it can safely be held that the accused-petitioner is reasonably connected with the commission of an offence which falls within the restrictive clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.

9.In view of the above discussion, I am not persuaded to release the accused- petitioner on bail. Hence this petition is dismissed. However, none of the above observations should prejudice mind of the learned trial Court which shall decide the case on merit.

MH/544/P Petition dismissed.