2004 PLP 1105 (YLR)

Miss Akhtar Rehana for the State. Date of hearing: 17th September, 2003. This order shall dispose of the above mentioned two bail applications relating to the same offence.

2. Facts of the case are that during night intervening 19th and 20th March, 2003 at about 9-45 p.m. two bandits equipped with pistols entered the house of complainant Mujeebullah and made the inmates hostage at pistol point. They then took away one DBBL shotgun, saving certificates worth Rs.5,00,000 and jewellry. The F.I.R. of the incident was lodged by Mujeebullah on 20-3-2003 at 4-00 p.m. with Saoodabad Police.

3. It is said that during investigation applicant's co-accused Arshad Baig Mirza was arrested and he, during interrogation, informed that applicants Adeel-ur-Rehman and Muhammad Atiq were also with him and Mirza Qamran when they had committed robbery from the house of Mujeebullah. It is also said that on 25-3 2003, on a tip of, party of Saoodabad police found applicant Adeel-ur-Rehman armed with DBBL gun available in the bushes near Malir Colony. When challenged he managed his escape throwing the gun there. The gun which he is alleged to have thrown was same which had been robbed from the house of Mujeebullah.

4. On 27-5-2003, on the basis of information, a party of Saoodabad police arrested the applicants Adeel-ur-Rehman and Muhammad Atiq. They are alleged to have been possessing unlicensed pistols one each. Thereafter they are said to have led the police on 31-5-2003 and jointly produced some of the jewelry robbed from the house of Mujeebullah.

5. After investigation the applicants were sent for trial together with Mirza Arshad Baig. The fourth person challaned with them was Mirza Qamran. He was shown as absconder.

6. Heard arguments.

7. Firstly present is the case where Mujeebullah, the complainant, claimed only two persons to have committed robbery from his house but the police have challaned four persons. No identification test was arranged by the investigation officer. The only part of the robbed jewelry: is alleged to have been recovered from the applicants nearly about 40 days after the incident of robbery. Apparently for the A present recovery constitutes offence under section 411, P.P.C. which is punishable for three years and as such embargo put by section 497, Cr.P.C. is not attracted. Therefore, the applicants have a case for bail. Bail granted. They shall be released on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./A-20/K Bail granted.