2008 PLP 141 (MLD)

IQBAL HAMEED UL REHMAN, J.

Petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No. 270 of 2007, dated 26-4-2007 under sections 399, 402, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Gulgasht District Multan.

2. The precise allegations against the petitioner and others as per the contents of the F.I.R. is that the complainant along with other police officials was present at Bypass Bosan Road, Multan when he received an information that some persons along with Honda City (without number) were present near Wapda Colony armed with fire-arms with the intention to commit dacoity and if raid is conducted they could be apprehended. On receiving this information, he reached at the spot and on the pointation of informer the said persons were encircled whereupon the said five persons on seeing the police party came out of the car and tried to run away but after chasing they were apprehended, who disclosed their names as Rafique alias Feeqa, Iqbal, Fiaz Hussain, Khalid and Muhammad Afzal. They confessed that they were sitting there to commit some heinous offence. On their personal search, fire-arms were recovered from their possession and they could not produce any licence for the same, hence, this case.

3. Post-arrest bail of the petitioner has been dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan vide order, dated 28-5-2007.

4. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the occurrence took place in the morning hours at 1 a.m. before the Wapda Colony where there is a barrage of security guards present at the gate of the colony; the presence of the accused persons in such a surroundings cannot be expected; that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the case; that the instant case has been got registered by the Incharge Investigation, who is stated to be on patrolling duty; that the department of investigation has a different function; they are not deputed on patrolling duty, their only function is to conduct investigation. Further that the petitioner is behind the bars for more than five months. That the police has involved the petitioner wrongly just to show their efficiency; that in spite of the pre-information according to the F.I.R., at the time of raiding and the recovery of the alleged weapons, no public witness was associated in the raid although the place of occurrence is thickly populated area; that in the instant case, the complainant is the Investigating Officer as well as the witness.

5. On the other hand, grant of bail has been opposed by the learned Deputy Prosecutor-General on the ground that the petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. All the accused persons were fully armed with fire-arm weapons, they had the intention to commit some dacoity; that they belong to a famous Feeqa gang; that the offence with which the petitioner has been charged falls within the prohibitory clause; that the petitioner and other co-accused are habitual offenders; that the petitioner and one Rafique alias Feeqa have made their statement before the police and admitted the commission of other such-like offences.

6. Arguments heard. Record perused.

7. At this stage the only tentative assessment is to be taken into consideration. Prima facie sufficient material is available on the record to connect the petitioner with the commission of offence. The recovery of the weapons has been effected from the petitioner. According to the police record the petitioner is a member of an organized gang, who commits dacoity and are habitual offenders. They are involved in dacoity and car snatching cases. The crime of snatching cars not only on highways but also in local streets, towns and cities are increasing day by day on account of such characters because when they are arrested, such accused persons manipulate such defence in order to prove their innocence for their acquittal as well as for obtaining bails and after releasing on bail, again commit the same offence with more impunity. The Honda Car without any registration number has also been recovered from them, which further supports the prosecution case. The petitioner and other co-accused have been caught red-handed as they were armed with deadly weapons. The petitioner has also disclosed during the investigation that he and other co-accused snatched Honda Car and also admitted other crimes of dacoity; therefore, the petitioner do not deserve to be enlarged on bail. The offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is dismissed. N.H.Q./M-534/L Bail refused.