1993 P Cr (PLP)

Crl. Misc. No.900/H of 1992, decided on 19th December, 1992.

S. 491

Habeas corpus petition

Detenus were recovered by bailiff on filing the petition

Police contended that an entry in Roznamcha pertaining to detenus did exist, but it was not allotted any spec number and two alleged recovery memos. showed that stolen properties were recovered from detenus at their instance

Recovery memos. which were not shown to bailiff at time of raid, were - forged and were prepared after police station was raided-- Preparation of two recovery memos. and entries in Roznamcha relating to detenus, being doubtful, on request of petitioner, application was converted into a bail petition and bail granted to detenus. N.A. Butt for Petitioner. Muhammad Munir Bhatti, Shahid Mahmood and Akhtar Shabbir, Addl. A.-G. for Respondents. Date of hearing: 19th December, 1992. Sheikh Tariq son of Sheikh Abdul Qadir has moved this habeas corpus petition under section 491, Cr.P.C. for recovery and production of Sh. Suleman son of Sh. Tariq Mahmood and Amir son of Ashiq Hussain so that they may be dealt with according to law. On 17-12-1992, a bailiff of this Court was directed to recover and produce the detenus before this Court, today. The Investigating Officer and Muhammad Salim bailiff are present with record. The bailiff has submitted a detailed report. He says that he raided the police station on 17-12-1992 at 2-15 p.m. On inquiry, the Police Officer present on duty showed him the police record. He particularly noted that an entry in the Roznamcha pertaining to detenus did exist but it was not allotted any specific number. Muhammad Sharif S.I. says that he did not bring the requisite Roznamcha with him for perusal by this Court. The Court wanted to inspect the entries in the Roznamcha to find out the truth but on account of the non-availability of the record, it is not possible to do so. The presumption is that the statement of the bailiff might be true. Mr. Muhammad Munir Bhatti, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents relies upon two recovery memos. executed on 17-12-1992. These recovery memos show that a motor-cycle and scooter were recovered from the detenus at their instance. According to the bailiff these recovery memos. were not shown to him at the time of raid. It is argued by the learned counsel that these recovery memos. are forged and prepared after the police station was raided. Prima facie the recovery memos. appear to have been prepared later on. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the detenus were arrested on 17-12-1992 and that they made statements before the police that they would lead to the recovery of more stolen articles. Be that as it may, the preparation of the two recovery memos. and the entries in the Roznamcha relating to the detenus seem to be doubtful. This being so, this petition is converted into a bail petition as requested by the learned counsel and the detenus are admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (J.) of this Court. The detenus shall join the investigation of the case as and when they are required to do so by the investigator. In case the detenus do not join the investigation, the State shall be at liberty to move an application for the cancellation of bail granted to them. With these remarks, this petition stands disposed of. The security amount of Rs.2,000 shall be refunded to the petitioner today. H.B.T./T-50/L Bail granted.