2013 PLP 1320 (YLR)

QAISER RASHID KHAN, J.

Having been refused the concession of bail to the petitioner namely Abdul Wahid son of Abdur Rashid by the learned ASJ-II, D.I. Khan vide order dated 8-11-2012 in case F.I.R. No.678 dated 16-10-2012 registered under section 462-C, P.P.C. at Police Station City, D.I.Khan, he has filed the instant petition for the grant of same relief.

2. Succinctly stated facts of the case are that on 29-9-2012, during office hours, Abdul Ghafoor Khan, Senior Engineer, Distribution, SNGPL, D.I.Khan addressed a Letter No.DIK/491/12 dated 29-9-2012 for lodging of an F.I.R. against the accused/petitioner to the effect that their field staff reported that the accused/ petitioner had damaged their 2 inches commissioned underground pipeline and obtained direct gas connection which was removed by the raiding crew of the SNGPL in the presence of A.S.-I. Aurangzeb Khan under the compliance of DPO, D.I.Khan letter bearing Reference No.13702 dated 27-7-2012 and accordingly the F.I.R. ibid was registered against him.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the accused/petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to mala fide reasons and ulterior motive; that there is no evidence against the accused/petitioner to connect him with the commission of the offence. That there is inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R. which casts doubts on the prosecution version; that the alleged occurrence as per the contents of F.I.R. took place on the main street but still no eyewitness of the locality has been cited to support the prosecution version; that the petitioner has been roped in the case only under political pressure and in this respect he referred to certain press clippings wherein the matter was blown out of proportion in order to settle some score with the petitioner. Learned counsel argued that in respect of the gas connection, a sum of Rs.3000 were deposited with the department on 26-6-2012 whereafter the same was installed by Muhammad Sajjad, meter fitter of the department and, therefore, the case of the petitioner is one of further inquiry and thus he is entitled to the concession of bail.

4. The learned counsel for the complainant department as well as the learned D.A.-G. vehemently opposed the bail petition and argued that the petitioner had obtained an illegal gas connection by damaging the underground pipeline and he had exposed the other residents of the locality to high risk; that the offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail.

5. Arguments herd and record perused.

6. As the record reveals, it was on the letter dated 29-9-2012 addressed by Abdul Ghafoor Khan, Senior Engineer Distribution SNGPL, D.I.Khan whereby he reported that the accused/petitioner had damaged their 2 inches commissioned underground gas pipeline and illegally obtained direct gas connection which was removed by their. raiding crew in the presence of A.S.-I. Aurangzeb Khan who was in turn deputed in compliance with letter of DPO, D.I.Khan bearing Reference No.13702 dated 27-7-2012. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that an amount of Rs.3000 was deposited with the respondent department on account of the supply of gas connection on 26-9-2012 stands belied from the available record as the same was deposited by one Muhammad Ashiq Ali son of Abdul Majeed and certainly not by the petitioner. In this respect, learned counsel for the complainant verified the fact that on account of such payment, gas connection has been duly supplied to Muhammad Ashiq Ali and that Abdul Waheed has got his separate residence to which he had illegally and clandestinely arranged a gas connection by causing damage to the underground gas pipeline. As far as the gas connection supplied to his residence allegedly by Muhammad Sajjad meter fitter is concerned, the same has also at best backfired as according to the complainant, Muhammad Sajjad is not an employee of the SNGPL. Even otherwise, the offence for which the accused/petitioner is charged with attracts the prohibitory limb of section 497, Cr.P.C.

7. Thus taking a tentative account of the available record, the accused/petitioner is prima facie connected with the commission of the offence and is not entitled to the concession of bail.

8. For the reasons mentioned above, the instant petition being bereft of any merit is hereby dismissed. As per the record, challan in the case is complete, therefore, the prosecution is directed to submit the same before the learned trial Court within a fortnight and thereafter, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously but not later than four months.

9. Any observations made in the order being tentative in nature should in no way prejudice the proceedings before the learned trial Court. MH/53/P Bail refused.