2008 PLP 178 (MLD)

MRS. QAISER IQBAL, J.

Applicant Shahbaz Ali son of Mujahid Hussain, has repeated the bail application in Crime No.93/2006, under sections 392/324/34 P.P.C. - registered at Police Station Preedy Karachi (South). His bail plea was earlier rejected by this Court in Crime No.113/06 vide order, dated 26-3-2007, whereby the trial Court was directed to record ocular account within 90 days from the date of receipt of the order. The prosecution case emerged on the basis of the statement of complainant Muhammad Jamil, recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. stating there that he was engaged in the business of old parts of the computer. On the fateful day went to Pakistan Chowk. While he was making a call on mobile phone to the shopkeeper, two young boys came on motorcycle, on show of force directed the complainant to hand over his mobile phone. Complainant due to fear had delivered the mobile phone, 'in the meanwhile police' mobile came apprehended the applicant, while his companions managed to flee away. Mr. Ali Ahmed Junejo, learned counsel for the applicant has contended that despite the directions of this Court prosecution has failed to examine the ocular account comprising of three witnesses although sufficient time was allowed to the prosecution to complete the case within the specified time vide order, dated 26-3-2007. It is further contended that case diaries revealed that on each date of hearing the counsel appearing for the applicant was in attendance of Court, witnesses namely, HC-Shafaqat and PC-Jamal were present on 27-7-2007, but the matter was adjourned due to paucity of time, witnesses were bound down, subsequently, the applicant has proceeded to repeat the bail application. Learned State Counsel has opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant was caught on the spot, recovery of mobile from his possession in presence of mashirs was effected. I have considered the arguments advanced at bar. There is no cavil to the effect that edifice of the case is built on the statement of the complainant Muhammad Jamil and the Mashir of the recovery. The applicant is confined in jail for the last 18 months, the charge was framed by the trial Court, directions for recording the evidence has not been, complied with. In any view of the matter, it is a case of hardship when material witnesses could not be examined nor there is likelihood of the completion of trial in near future. Keeping in view the attending circumstances of the case, applicant Shahbaz Ali is entitled to concession of bail, accordingly admitted on bail, subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac only) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. H.B.T/S-93/K Bail granted.