2009 PLP 1136 (YLR)

SALMAN ANSARI, J.

This bail application has been moved on behalf of the four applicants above named. Brief facts of the case being that on 23-2-2008 while at his work place the complainant was informed to reach his house immediately, where he found a lot of people gathered, his sister in law Erum Naz narrated the incident that four persons had entered their house, on waking up the culprits tied her up but she managed to crawl to the other room where she found that the culprits had hanged and killed his wife Kishwar Naz, golden ornaments and valuables had been stolen. F.I.R. was lodged on 26-2-2008, the accused/ applicants were arrested on 10-3-2008. Identification parade was conducted and the eye-witnesses. picked out the accused, statements under section 164, Cr.P.C. were recorded of material witnesses, the learned Vth Addl. Sessions Judge, Karachi Central rejected the bail application of the four accused/applicants by order dated 27-9-2008 hence this bail application. The learned counsel for the applicants has argued that there is unexplained delay in the lodging of the F.I.R, the complainant had not named the applicants in the F.I.R, the allegedly robbed property was recovered from the house of the complainant, there is delay in conducting identification parade, and recording of 164, Cr.P.C. statements, placing reliance upon 2007 PCr.LJ 1049 (Muhammad Nawaz v. The State), 2008 YLR 1968 (Tassawar Hussain v. The State), 2008 YLR 1179 (Shamsullah v. The State) the learned counsel of the applicants has argued that the case requires further inquiry hence bail application be allowed. The learned State counsel has not opposed the bail application. Having heard the arguments, I reproduce the reasons given by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge for rejection of bail, being; Record indicates that present applicants/accused have been identified during identification parade by three prosecution witnesses. The record further indicates that statements under section 164, Cr.P.C. were also recorded whereby P.W. Erum Naz, Hafiz Khan Muhammad and Rahimuddin have fully implicated present applicants/accused. The record further indicates that at the pointation of present applicant/accused looted articles were got recovered in presence of, independent witnesses.. I find no error in the findings of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge in his order rejecting the bail application, in my opinion until and unless the evident of the eye-witnesses is recorded especially of P.W. Erum Naz who was present at the time of the incident and of the witnesses who had identified the applicants/accused in the identification parade, finding that the applicant/accused are not entitled to the concession of bail at this stage, I reject his bail application. This with due respects to the case-law cited which I find from its bare reading, the findings not to apply to the facts and circumstances of the present case. H.B.T.M-202/K Bail refused.