ORDER
SHEET
------------------------------------------------------
Date Order
with signature of Judge
------------------------------------------------------
Date of hearing 14.10.2015
Mr.
Muhammad Tariq Abbasi Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr.
Muhammad Iqbal Awan APG.
SYED HASAN AZHAR RIZVI J; By this order I intend to dispose of instant Criminal
Bail Application filed by the Applicant/accused Safder Ali son of Inayat Ali.
Brief
facts of the case as incorporated in the FIR are that the accused/persons
committed dacoity at the house of the complainant and after taking valuable
articles including cash ran away from the house.
Learned Counsel for the
Applicant contended that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely
implicated in the case by complainant with connivance of local police due to
malafide intention and some ulterior motives. Learned Counsel further contends
that there is delay of about 15 hours in lodging the FIR and no plausible reasons are given neither in FIR
nor in statement of complainant. Learned Counsel for the Applicant further
contended that identification parade was held on 5th day of arrest
of the Applicant therefore, the same is doubtful. Learned Counsel urged that
co-accused Waseem Solangi has already been granted bail by the Trial Court
therefore, present applicant is also entitled for grant of bail. He has relied
upon 2012 YLR 1199, 2010 P.Cr.L.J. 1120 and 2012 YLR 2942.
Learned APG vehemently opposed the grant of bail to
the Applicant and submits that after arrest of the Applicant recovery was
affected from him and complainant and witnesses identified him during
identification parade held before the Judicial Magistrate.
Heard Mr. Muhammad Tariq Abbasi Advocate for the
Applicant, Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan APG for the State and perusal the record as
well as citations with their assistance.
On tentative assessment of the material available on
record, it appears that the present Applicant was arrested on 13.03.2015 and at
the time of his arrest recovery was affected from his possession. After arrest
of the applicant his identification parade was held before the concerned
Magistrate wherein the complainant and witness identified the Applicant to be
the same accused who committed dacoity at their house with specific role of
being armed and snatching of articles. Nothing has been alleged that the
accused was shown to the complainant/witness prior to identification parade and
no illegality or irregularity has been pointed out in holding the
identification parade therefore, mere delay in holding the identification
parade does not brush it aside when it is held in properly and justly. The
cases of snatching of valuable articles on gun point are increasing day-by-day
in the city abundantly and in such incidents usually bandits kill the innocent
person, therefore, such cases should be dealt with scarcely to curtail the
crimes.
The contention of the learned Counsel for the
Applicant that the co-accused has already been granted bail therefore, present
Applicant is also entitled for grant of bail following the rule of consistency.
This
contention advanced by the learned counsel for the accused, in my humble
opinion is devoid of any force for the simple reason that in criminal
administration of justice, the case of each and every accused is different from
the case of co-accused and it could not be said that the case of Applicant/accused
is identical to the case of the other accused persons. No enmity, ill-will or
grudge has been alleged against the complainant to falsely implicate the
present Applicant in the present case. Even nothing is said that the In the present case ample and sufficient
material is available on record which prima facie connects the Applicant in the
present crime and I do not find any reason to disbelieve the version of the
prosecution as at the bail stage only tentative assessment is to be taken into
consideration.
Cases law cited by the
learned counsel for the applicant in my humble opinion are distinguishable from
the facts and circumstances of the present case as such those are not applicant
to it.
Above are the reasons of my short order dated 14.10.2015
whereby present bail application was dismissed. However, learned Trial Court
was directed to conclude the trial within three (03) months from the date of
receipt of this order.
The observations made
are of tentative nature and the Trial Court shall not be influenced by any of
such observations.
Karachi J
U D G E
Dated:_________________