NAJEEB ULLAH vs THE STATE
This bail application was filed by the applicant/accused Najeebullah, who was charged under Section 392/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The prosecution's case was that the applicant and his accomplice robbed the complainant of Rs. 600 at gunpoint and were apprehended on the spot by the police with the stolen money and weapons. The applicant's counsel argued that no public witnesses were associated with the recovery, the applicant was misidentified, and the recovery was fabricated. Conversely, the State opposed bail, highlighting that the applicant was caught red-handed. The High Court of Sindh evaluated the arguments and held that since the applicant was apprehended on the spot and the stolen property and weapon were recovered from him, a prima facie case was established under Section 392/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. Consequently, as the offence is non-bailable, the court dismissed the bail application.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted to an accused who was apprehended on the spot with the stolen money and weapon?
- Does the absence of public witnesses to a recovery on the spot automatically entitle an accused to bail in a robbery case?
- Whether a prima facie case under Section 392/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 disentitles an accused to the concession of bail?
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' SALMAN ANSARI, J.---This bail application has been moved on behalf of applicant/accused Najeebullah. According to the statement of complainant incorporated with the F.I.R. The facts of the case are that on 23-9-2008 at about 2-00 a.m. While the complainant was going to his home at railway Phatak two young boys armed with revolver and dagger took Rs,600 from his pocket on gun-point. On commotion raised by the complainant people gathered, they called police at 15 Madadgar. The Police managed to apprehend the accused on the spot and recovered Rs,600 and .30 bore T.T. Pistol containing two live bullets from applicant and from his accomplice accused Abdullah recovered a dagger, after that a case under section 392/34, P.P.C. Has been registered at police station Mithadar.
2. Learned trial Court rejected the bail application of applicant vide order dated 1-12-2008.
3. Learned counsel for applicants has contended that no witness has been associated from the public at large and the applicant has not been caught on the spot. He has further contended that it is a case of misidentify, nothing was recovered from the applicant and the recovery, if any, has been foisted upon the applicant as he has been implicated in the case falsely. The dagger shown in the mashirnama actually is a knife and considering the fact that it was the night time, hence applicant may be released on bail who is a young person and there is no likelihood that trial may be concluded in near future. Learned Additional Prosecutor-General has vehemently opposed the bail application as according to him the applicant has been caught on the spot. These kind of the incidents have made the life of people miserable by putting the ordinary person in grave danger.
4. Having heard the arguments in this matter, the applicant who has been apprehended on the spot and recovery was effected from the applicant, hence, prima facie, the case against, applicant has been made out under section 392/34, P.P.C. Which is not bailable. Accordingly, I reject this bail application.