FOR HEARING.
23.10.2003
Mr. Syed Ahmed Ali Shah, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Habib-ur-Rasheed, Advocate for the State.
By this order I intend to dispose of Criminal Bail application filed on behalf of applicant Gulzar Hussain, in a case bearing Crime FIR No. 92/03, for offence under Section 394 read with 34 PPC registered at P.S. Sharafi Goth. The bail plea of the applicant was declined by the learned Sessions Judge, Malir, Karachi, wide order dated 20.9.2003.
The prosecution story as unfolded in the FIR is that on 21.7.2003 at 1645 hrs, Complainant Muhammad Iqbal appeared at P.S. Sharafi Goth and lodged FIR bearing No. 92/03, the details whereof are given as under:-
“I am living at the above mentioned address along with my children and is a taxi driver, I was standing at a Malir Mender Bus Stop along with my taxi JL-1164 that at about 3:30 P.M. four young boys came to me and asked me to go to future colony with them and four persons seated in the taxi and we left the stop. That at about 3:45 P.M. as we reached near Memon Poultry Farm beside Railway Phatak Pakistan Pantry in future colony that one of the accused persons whose name is Gulzar Hussain hit Pistol’s butt on the head and asked me to hand over to him whatever I had and I became injured and I fell down on the earth. On this some mohalla peoples namely Liaqat Shah s/o Barkat Shah, Rehmat Sher s/o Muhammad Sher came to help me and the accused persons tried to ran away leaving the taxi and meanwhile Police mobile also reached there and apprehended two persons who disclosed their names as Gulzar Hussain s/0 Mirawais and Tahir Mehmood s/o Ahmed Din and they disclosed the names of the absconding accused persons as one Amjad s/o unknown and Shakil s/o unknown and I came to P.S. along with police and my complaint is against arrested accused persons for snatching money and making me injured with the butt of pistol. Action may be taken.”
The investigation followed and in due course applicant was sent back to stand trial in the Court of learned Sessions Judge Malir Karachi.
I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the case against his client is false who has been involved in the background of enmity and under suspicion. It has also been contended that nothing incriminating was secured from the possession of the applicant. However it has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was apprehended on the spot and during the course of incident it was found that he has sustained injuries by means of butt from fire arm but there is no medical evidence. He has further argued that the eye witness Liaqat Shah and Nazar Muhammad have sworn in their affidavits before the trial Court exculpating the applicant from the commission of crime. However he states that as far as Complainant Iqbal is concern he has not sworn in any affidavit. Counsel has referred to 2002 MLD 1502 (Gul Hassan vs. the State), in support of his contentions.
As against the arguments of learned counsel for the applicant it has been contended by the learned Counsel for the State, Mr. Habib-ur-Rasheed that name of the applicant transpire in the FIR and he was arrested on the spot along with weapon of offence such as Pistol by which he has sustain injury by means of butt from Pistol. He has also argued that the Complainant has fully supported the case of prosecution and the witnesses filing affidavit had tempered with the case of the prosecution. Learned Counsel for the State lastly argues that it is fit case where the applicant could be enlarged on bail.
I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record, which reveals that the name of the applicant find place in the FIR which is without any loss of time as according to FIR incident taken place at 1545 hrs, whereas the FIR was recorded on the same day at 1645 hrs, which is without any loss of time. The name of the applicant find place in the FIR. The perusal of the FIR reveals that the applicant was apprehended at the spot along with weapon of offence. In the circumstances the applicant Gulzar Ahmed is not entitled to the grant of bail, which consequently is dismissed . Criminal Bail Application No. 1198 of 2003 stands disposed of.
At the close of the order it has been contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the trial Court be directed to proceed with the case expeditiously in as much as after the recording of evidence of three witnesses and thereafter it would be open for him to repeat bail application before the trial Court if so advised. Order accordingly.
JUDGE