ZAFAR IQBAL Versus STATE

ORDER

This order will dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous Nos.4513/B to 4515/B of 1993 having commonality of facts and law viz., petitioners members of the police force are seeking post-arrest bails in the cases registered vide F.I.R. No.180 of 26-4-1993 under section 395, P.P.C. read with section 17 of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 alleging house-trespass by night and dacoity of the within mentioned articles of jewellery and watch worth Rs.18,000 at gun point by 5 persons, 3 of whom were equipped with fire-arms and identified by description with two named i.e. Munir Masih and Faqiria Bhatti; No.188 of 28-4-1993 under section 382, P.P.C, read with section 17 of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 alleging house trespass and theft of Luminar T.V. by 7 persons, three of whom were identified by name including the petitioners and No.186 of 28-4-1993 under identical provisions alleging theft of ornaments, clothes and Rs.2,000 cash, cumulatively amounting to Rs.20,000 by 7 persons, one of whom identified by name being petitioner No.l, at Police Station "A" Division, Kasur contending false involvement at the instance of Muhammad Anwar, S.I. for having reported his son Shehryar for narco trade and him for excessiveness to the authorities, belated recourse to the police, lack of identification parade, disowning of the complained of recoveries by the witnesses thereof through sworn affidavits, sufferance of nearly 9 months incarceration and with the submission of challan are no more required by the investigating agency. While learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposed the same reiterating the prosecution story.

2. I am afraid, though the contention as to mala fide remains unsubstantiated, while belated lodging of the FIRS. has been duly explained therein and the plea qua lack of identification parade has been advanced in oblivion of the petitioners being named accused in the latter two cases, thus are ill-founded; however, on account of petitioners' 9 months incarceration without trial the recovery witnesses resiling, are entitled to the sought for concession; consequently, are allowed bail upon furnishing bonds in the sum of Rs.30,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

N.H.Q./Z-110/L

Bail allowed.