ORDER SHEET
_____________________________________________________
ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE
_____________________________________________________
1) For orders on M.A. 2898/2007. (urgent application)
2) For hearing.
28.8.2007.
Mr. Abdul Samad Memon for applicant.
Mr. Fazlur Rehman Awan State counsel.
______
The applicant has applied for bail in Crime No. 68/2007 under section 398/34 PPC registered at P.S. Artillery Maidan. His bail application was rejected by IInd Additional Sessions Judge Karachi South, therefore applicant has preferred this bail application.
Precisely the facts leading to the case are that complainant Muhammad Afzal Khan Manager of Lund Brothers Bus Service, Cant. Karachi lodged report that five persons wearing shalwar kamiz came to the place of occurrence, two of them purchased tickets for Ghotki, two purchased tickets for Dharki and one has purchased ticket for Obaro. After 10 minutes they again appeared and wearing paints and shirts took out the weapons upon which the people raised cries in the meanwhile police of Artilary Maidan reached at the spot and with the help of the people apprehended the accused including the applicant and secured T.T. Pistol from their possession.
Mr. Abdul Samad Memon learned counsel for applicant has contended that the allegations levelled against the applicant are false per see as the element of Section 381 PPC are missing in the case. The applicant and co-accused did not commit dacoity as alleged in the First Information Report on the place of the occurrence and a dubious role has been attributed to the applicant as their hulia and descriptions are not described in the First Information Report brining the case within the ambit of further inquiry.
Learned State counsel has also supported the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for applicant, suggested that mere arrest of the applicant would not tantamount the involvement of the applicant.
I have considered the arguments advanced at bar. In fact the description of the culprits have not been incorporated in the First Information Report about their arrival on the spot at the first instance and after 10 minutes they again came at the place of occurrence and had changed the dresses. They had attempted to commit dacoity on show of force. Admittedly no recovery was effected from the possession of the applicant, the charge has been framed. The case against the applicant requires further inquiry. This view fortified from the case of ASIF RAZA VS. THE STATE (2006 P.CR.L.J. 1628). Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant is admitted on bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
J U D G E