2012 PLP 1417 (YLR)

MUHAMMAD TASNIM, J.

Applicant is booked in Crime No.946 of 2010, under section 4, P.P.C., Police Station Korangi Industrial Area, Karachi. Applicant, in the first place, applied for bail before the learned IInd-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi East, who vide order dated 29-8-2011 had dismissed the bail application filed by the applicant. Against the aforesaid order present bail application has been filed.

2. The facts of prosecution, as setout in the F.I.R., are that on 26-9-2010 while complainant was going on his Motorcycle No. KCS-3324 he was intercepted by four accused namely Saeed Khan, Saqib, Namroz and Abdullah who were armed and stopped the complainant. They snatched cash amount of Rs. 40,000 mobile phone Nokia 6230 from the complainant. It is further claimed that above named accused persons also snatched the aforesaid motorcycle from the complainant. In the circumstances present F.I.R. was lodged.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant in support of this bail application has submitted that present F.I.R. was lodged on 26-9-2010 whereas the present applicant was arrested after the lapse of ten months. He says that no recovery of any money, motorcycle or mobile phone has been effected from the applicant. He says that complainant has previous enmity with the applicant and such fact can be confirmed from the contents of the F.I.R. wherein the complainant says that applicant along-with other 10/12 companions with arms came at his plot and tried to encroach upon the said plot, but with the help of mohalla people such encroachment was avoided. Learned counsel says that due to previous enmity applicant has been falsely implicated in this crime. Learned counsel says that case of the applicant is a fit case in which further enquiry is called for and the applicant be enlarged on bail.

4. On the other hand learned A.P.-G. has opposed this bail application and has submitted that name of the applicant appears in the F.I.R. and he is involved in a crime against the society. He says that if applicant is enlarged on bail there is likelihood that he may commit the similar offence again.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. A tentative assessment of the record shows that there appears some previous enmity between the parties. The applicant was arrested after ten months of lodging of F.I.R. No recovery appears to have been effected from the applicant. Neither the money, nor the motorcycle or mobile phone or any weapon was recovered from the applicant. In the circumstances false implication of the applicant in the crime cannot be ruled out.

7. In view of above, I am of the view that this case requires further enquiry in terms of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Accordingly, present applicant is admitted to bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees One Lac) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. M.W.A./S-116/K Bail granted.