Jamshed alias Jimmi vs State etc
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the petitioner, Jamshed alias Jimmi, in connection with an FIR registered under Section 392 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for alleged robbery. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the circumstances of the investigation and the evidentiary gaps in the prosecution's case. The Court observed that while the petitioner was nominated in the FIR, there was a history of animosity between the parties, and the petitioner had previously been found innocent by the police in a separate case. Crucially, the prosecution failed to produce a medico-legal certificate to substantiate the alleged torture of the complainant, and no recovery of the snatched items was made during the petitioner's eleven-day physical remand. Consequently, the Court held that the case against the petitioner required further inquiry. The petition was allowed, and the petitioner was admitted to post-arrest bail, subject to furnishing bail bonds, establishing the principle that the absence of corroborative evidence and recovery, coupled with a plausible defense of enmity, warrants the grant of bail pending trial.
- Does the failure to recover stolen items during physical remand constitute grounds for further inquiry in a robbery case?
- Is the absence of a medico-legal certificate relevant when determining the strength of the prosecution's case for bail?
- Can a history of enmity between the complainant and the accused be a factor in granting post-arrest bail?
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
The petitioner Jamshed alias Jimmi throu gh this bail application has come up to this Court seeking his release on post arrest bail in connection with case F.I.R No. 692 of 2021 dated 10.11.2021, registered for offence under section 392 PPC at police station Kot Chutta District D.G. Khan.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith his co-accused persons while armed with their respective weapons committed robbery of motorcycle, mobile phone, cash of Rs. 5,000/- etc. from complainant.
3. The complainant present in the Court expresses his satisfaction if the case is agued by the learned Prosecutor on his behalf.
4. Heard. Perused.
5. Though the petitioner is nominated in the crime report yet the fact also rema ins that witness Sajjad Hussain brother of the complainant, got lodged F.I.R No. 426 of 2020 dated 15.12.2020 for offence under Section 324, 148 and 149, PPC at police station Chotti, District D.G. Khan in which petitioner remained accused and pre-arrest bail filed by the petitioner in the aforesaid case was withdrawn by him on 28,01.2021, having been found innocent by' the police. During investigation of this case, stance of the petitioner remained that he has been implicated due to previous grudge of the family of the complainant though the same has not been investigated. Per crime report, the complainant was tortured at the time of occurrence but no medico-legal examination certificate is available on record to substantiate the same part of prosecution story . During extensive physical remand of 11 days, nothing allegedly snatched could be recovered at the instance of the petitioner . The facts mentioned supra make this case one of further inquiry into petitioner's guilt entitling him to the grant of post arrest bail. Hence, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (five lacs) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.