ORDER SHEET
----------------------------------------------------
Date Order
with signature of Judge
----------------------------------------------------
Date of hearing 17.05.2012
Mr. Syed Azmat Shah Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan learned APG.
-------@@@@-------
Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi J; By this order I would decide the
bail application filed by the Applicant Muhammad Mubeen.
Precisely, the facts of the case as narrated in the
FIR are that on 25.12.2011 the complainant alongwith his friends Muhammad Azam
Abbasi and Nawaz Sher Jalil in his car bearing registration No.ALH-132 at about
0800 hours went to Hawksbay and while they were returning to their house at
about 0010 hours near Eidhi Chowrangi one white Hi-Roof bearing No.CG-9538
wherein four persons were sitting intercepted them. The persons alighted from
the said Hi-Roof and pointed weapons upon them and snatched laptops, mobile
phones, one gold ring and one gold chain etc., etc., and ran away from the spot
in the said Hi-Roof towards Maripur. Suddenly a police mobile came there and
the complainant told the incident to them whereupon police chased the accused
persons, who on seeing the police started firing upon police party and police
also made firing upon the accused persons in encounter. Police
cordoned/encircled them and arrested the accused persons at the spot and
recoveries of the articles including weapons were made from them.
Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the
Applicant/accused is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant
case at behest of the complainant. He contended that while dismissing the bail
Application of the Applicant Trial Court has not taken into consideration that
report/roznamcha entry of missing of the Applicant/accused was lodged at P.S.
Kalri. Learned Counsel for the Applicnat urged that the Applicant cannot drive
any vehicle but the prosecution has shown him as driver of the vehicle.
According to the learned Counsel the prosecution story as narrated in the FIR
is concocted as neither any persons received injury nor any
single bullet hit the vehicle. No avert act or specific role has been
attributed to the Applicant by the prosecution. He further urged that provision
of section 103 Cr.P.C. has not been complied with.
On the other learned APG has vehemently opposed the
grant of bail to the Applicant and submitted that Applicant was arrested at the
spot and stolen laptop and knife were recovered from the possession of the
present Applicant. He further contended that bail of the co-accused Ghulam Fareed
has already been dismissed on 13.04.2012 by this Court.
I have heard Mr. Syed Azmat Shah Counsel for the
Applicant, Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan learned APG and perused the relevant
material available on record with their assistance.
On tentative assessment of the material available on
record, it appears that FIR was lodged promptly by the complainant. Applicant
has been nominated in the FIR. Applicant was arrested at the spot after encounter, knife and snatched laptop of the complainant were
recovered from the possession of the Applicant. Bail Application of co-accused
Ghulam Fareed has already been dismissed by this Court.
Rampant law and order situation prevailing in the city
and country super normal hike and such kind of street crimes and snatching of
valuable articles require to be curbed and if accused persons would be released
on bail within such short span of time they certainly take law lightly.
For
the foregoing reasons, I am of the view that the learned Counsel for the
Applicant has failed to make out the case for grant of bail to the Applicant,
therefore, by my short order dated 17.05.2012 instant bail application was
dismissed with the direction to the Trial Court to conclude the trial within a period of two months
from receipt of the order. Thereafter, the Applicant would be at liberty to
move fresh Bail Application.
Observations made hereinabove are
of tentative nature and the trial Court shall not be influenced by any such
observations.
J
U D G E