2019 P Cr (PLP)

OMAR SIAL, J.

Through this order I intend to dispose of the captioned bail application filed by the applicants in crime number 117/2016 under sections 395/337-A(i), P.P.C. registered at Police Station Gulistan-e-Jauhar, Karachi. On 17-11-2016 vide an order of this Court, the applicants were granted interim pre-arrest bail, subject to each one of them furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 50,000 and a PR Bond in the like amount. The interim pre-arrest bail was granted by Mr. Justice Shahnawaz Tariq who has since retired. Consequently, this bail application has come before this Bench for confirmation or otherwise. Both applicants are present in Court today. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicants as well as the learned APG and the complainant. I have also perused the record with the assistance of the learned counsel. My observations are as follows. Brief facts of the case are that on 26-2-2016 five persons, namely Muhammad Atif (one of the present applicants), Muhammad Raza, Shabbir alias Chotu and two not identified came to the complainant's house and committed dacoity by taking away gold and money. About fifteen days later i.e. on 11-3-2016, Muhammad Atif (one of the present applicants), Ishaq (the second applicant), Muhammad Raza and another unknown person came to Hazara Goth where they came across the complainant and while Muhammad Atif held him by the collar, Ishaq and Muhammad Raza hit him on the head with some solid object. Consequently, the complainant was injured. It appears from the record that the police investigated this crime and the investigation officer on 27-4-2016 recommended disposal of the FIR in "C" Class. The trial judge did not accept the police recommendation and on 25-5-2016 ordered that the concerned SSP depute an honest police officer to conduct a re-investigation. A fresh report was filed in which the applicants were shown as accused and which report was accepted by the trial court. There appear to be counter FIRs registered by the applicants against the complainant as well. On the face of it there appears to be a long standing enmity between the parties in which false involvement of the applicants cannot be ruled out. The complainant alleges that the dacoity (pursuant to which the applicants were charged with a section 395, P.P.C.) offence was carried out on 26-2-2016. On 11-3-2016 the parties alleged quarreled and the complainant was injured. On both these occasions the complainant did not go to register an FIR. However, another twelve days later i.e. on 23- 3-2016 it dawned upon him that he should go to the police station and register an FIR for both, the dacoity and the injury. This delay which has occurred remained unexplained by the learned APG and the complainant himself. Applicant Ishaq is not named as one of the persons who committed the dacoity. The complainant does not even know with what exactly he was hit on the head with by the applicants. The offence under section 337(a)(i), P.P.C. carries a punishment of two years and in any case is a bailable offence. As regards the charge of dacoity only applicant Atif is named as one of the persons who came to the house of the complainant. There is substantial delay in reporting the crime to the police as discussed above. Vague details are given in the FIR with regards to the exact property stolen. No recovery has been effected to date. The parties appear to have a long standing enmity. The veracity of the prosecution can only be determined after evidence is led by the parties. For the above reasons, the interim pre-arrest bail granted earlier by this court is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions. WA/I-21/Sindh Bail confirmed.