2004 P Cr (PLP)

‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.397/34‑‑‑West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13‑D‑‑‑Bail, refusal of‑‑‑Evidence on record showed that accused was one of the bandits having robbed the complainant of cash and then made him hostage‑‑‑Accused was captured while running after arrival of police on the cries of victim/complainant‑‑ Identification was also arranged and complainant had rightly picked up the accused in presence of the Magistrate‑‑‑Acquittal of accused in the case under S.13‑D of West Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965 for non -production of evidence before Trial Court, would not justify grant of bail to accused in the case. Mst. Riffat for Applicant. Mumtaz Ali Khan Deshmukh for the State. According to the prosecution during the night intervening 19 and 20 of December, 2003 when complainant Muhammad Idrees stopped his Civic Honda Car Registration No.AAC‑291 at signal near Bombino Cinema Saddar when three bandits who were on motorcycle came close to him. Two of them opened the door of the car and occupied the seat. At pistol point cash Rs.23,000 and US Dollor $ 1500 were snatched from him. He was then directed, to drive the car towards Landhi. On the way at New Town Police Station the complainant shouted and the car also went out of control and its engine went off. At that time one of the bandits got down and tried to run away but was captured by the police alongwith his T.T. pistol. The other ran away after causing bullet injury to the complainant on his leg. The captive disclosed his name as Amir son of Muhammad Shafi. After that the present case and another case under section 13‑D of Arms Ordinance were registered against the captive. After the investigation the challan was presented in the Court. The bail plea of the applicant could not succeed before the learned trial Court, therefore, present application has been filed. The main arguments on behalf of the applicant advanced before this Court are that he has been acquitted in the case registered under section 13‑D, Arms Ordinance. On query the learned Advocate for the applicant informed that in fact the applicant was acquitted without recording the evidence, as the same was not produced before the learned trial Court. Thus, the acquittal was not on merits. The evidence on record is that the applicant is one of the bandits having robbed the complainant of cash and then made him hostage for taking them towards Landhi. He was captured while running after arrival of police on the cries of the victim/complainant. For confirmation the identification test was also arranged and the complainant is said to have rightly picked him out in presence of the Magistrate. In presence of that evidence the acquittal of the applicant for non‑production of the evidence does not justify the grant of bail to him in this case. Application, dismissed. H.B.T./M‑15/K Bail application dismissed.