Shakaz Baig VS State, etc

ORDER SHEET.

ISLAMABAD HIGH COURT, ISLAMABAD.

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT.

Criminal Misc. No. 215-B of 2021

Shakaz Baig Versus The State and another

S.No. of Date of Order with signature of Judge and that of parties order/ order/ or counsel where necessary. proceeding proceeding

02.18.03.2021 Raja Muhammad Shafqat Khan Abbasi, Advocate for the petitioner/accused.

Mr. Babar Ali, State Counsel.

Mr. Azhar Hussain, DSP (Legal) Mr. Nawazish, S.I

Through the instant petition, the petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No. 499/20, dated 08.11.2020, offences under section 394/411 P.P.C., registered at police station Kohsar, Islamabad.

02.Brief facts of the case are that the complainant reported to Police Station Kohsar on 08.11.2020 that two unknown persons attacked and snatched valuable articles and cash amounting to Rs. 6,000/- (Six Thousand Rupees) from him on 28.10.2020. Out of two assailants one has made Dranti blow and injured his left hand, hence, the instant FIR.

03.Learned counsel for the petitioner / accused contends that the petitioner / accused is not nominated in the FIR; there is no evidence available against the petitioner regarding commission of offence; no recovery has been

Criminal Misc. No. 215-B of 2021

effected from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that the accused/petitioner is innocent and prayed for bail after arrest. He has placed reliance on “Manzoor and 4 others Vs. The State” (PLD 1972 SC 81), “Mustafa alias Arshad Vs. The State and others (2016 PCr.LJ 1602), “Shahryar Vs. The State and another” (2019 PCr.LJ Note 85), “Arslan alias Shani Vs. The State and another” (2017 YLR Note 125), “Tariq Naeem Vs. The State and others” (2007 PCr. LJ 1015), “Gul Bahar and another Vs.

The State” (2011 PCr. LJ 985), “Naseer Khan Vs.

Nadir Khan and another” (2017 PCr. LJ Note 140), “Nazir Ahmad Vs. The State and another” (2017 PCr. LJ Note 14), “Muhammad Ibraheem and another Vs. The State and another” (2020 YLR

04.On the other hand, learned State Counsel has controverted the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and states that the accused/petitioner has committed a heinous crime and recovery from the petitioner has been effected and has prayed for dismissal of bail after arrest.

05.I have heard the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the Petitioner, learned State Counsel and perused the record.

06.According to the prosecution story the alleged occurrence took place on 28.10.2020 but

Criminal Misc. No. 215-B of 2021

complainant has reported the matter to police on 08.11.2020; the police station is at a distance of 8 KM from the place of occurrence; no plausible explanation has been given for reporting the matter to police with an inordinate delay. The identification parade was conducted on 04.12.2020 that is after more than twenty (20) days of the arrest of accused/petitioner, as it is alleged in the FIR that two persons snatched the valuable articles/currency and one of them inflicted Dranti blow on the left hand of the complainant but during the identification parade, the complainant has not described any role of both the accused arrested by the police.

07.Section 394 of Pakistan Penal Code provides that:

“394.Voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery:

If any person, in committing or in attempting to commit robbery, voluntarily causes hurt, such person, and any other person jointly concerned in committing or attempting to commit such robbery, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with rigorous imprisonment for a term [which shall not be less than four years nor more than] ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

But in the instant case, no Medico Legal Report of the complainant is available on record; there is only outdoor ticket of the Federal Government Polyclinic Hospital, Islamabad which shows that the complainant approached the hospital on 28.10.2020 with the complaint of bleeding from finger plus palm and the reason of the bleeding mentioned in the said ticket is history of accident

Criminal Misc. No. 215-B of 2021

thirty (30) minutes ago. Possibility cannot be ruled out that the complainant had tried to introduce factum of robbery just to give heinous touch to the occurrence.

08.It is important to remember that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment. There is no legal or moral compulsion to keep people in jail merely on the allegation that they have committed offences punishable with death or transportation, unless reasonable grounds exist to disclose their complicity. The ultimate conviction and incarceration of a guilty person can repair the wrong caused by a mistaken relief of bail after arrest granted to him, but no satisfactory reparation can be offered to an innocent man for his unjustified incarceration at any stage of the case albeit his acquittal in the long run. Reliance is placed on case reported as “Manzoor and 4 others Vs. The State” (PLD 1972 SC 81). Investigation in the case has been completed; Challan/Report U/s 173 Cr.P.C has been submitted but there is no progress in the case.

09.A tentative assessment of record shows that present petitioner has made out a case of further inquiry as envisaged under Section 497(2) Cr.P.C.

10.In view of above, the instant petition is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.

100,000/- (Rupees One Hundred Thousand only)

Criminal Misc. No. 215-B of 2021

with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

11.Needless to mention that, this is a tentative assessment which shall not affect the trial of case in any manner.

(TARIQ MEHMOOD JAHANGIRI)

JUDGE

Ahmed Sheikh