ALI ANWAR vs THE STATE

ORDER

1. ' The applicant has sought bail who is involved in Crime F.I.R. No,17 of 2002, registered at Police Station Nasirabad for an offence under sections 148, 149 and 402, P.P.C.

2. ' Briefly the facts are that on 1-3-2002 on a tip off regarding presence of six armed outlaws, complainant A.S.-I. Abdul Kareem Massan of Police Station Nasirabad alongwith entourage went to Loothi Sim Shakh where he found all the six persons duly armed with deadly weapons including present applicant Ali Anwar Tagar who was armed with a gun. On seeing the police party accused persons tried to escape the scene but as a result of rapid action by party two of accused namely present applicant Ali Anwar and co-accused Ghulam Sarwar were apprehended alongwith their respective guns and cartridges while rest of accused succeeded to get away. Accused apprehended and their respective weapons were brought to police station where such F.I.R. Was lodged to the above effect as well as a separate case under section 13-D, Arms Ordinance was recorded against applicant Ali Anwar and Ghulam Sarwar but their arrest was shown in a pending Crime No,14 of 2002 for an offence under sections 324, 353, 148 and 149, P.P.C.

3. ' Apparently the bail plea moved on behalf of the applicant was declined by the trial Court vide impugned order dated 27-5-2002.

4. ' It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that case is engineered one on flimsy grounds at the hands of police. Except alleged presence at bridge of Lothi Sim Shakh alongwith five others, no overt act is attributed to the present applicant and others as well. He further argued that despite prior spy information compliance of section 103, Cr.P.C. Was overlooked and police personnel were appointed as Mashirs and P.Ws. Who are interested and set up. The names and parentage of present applicant and other co-accused were specifically mentioned in the F.I.R.

5. Without explaining source of their identification which fact is to be thrashed out of the time of trial.

6. It is further case of applicant that the bail in pending Crime No,14 of 2002 is granted to the present applicant by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana.

7. ' I have carefully considered the arguments of learned counsel for the applicant and the material brought on record. This is a case where amazingly only two of the accused were apprehended by the police and fire from the either was made despite the fact that all the six accused persons were armed with deadly weapons. No overt act is attributed to any of the accused persons. The section 402 carries punishments up to seven years, hence the case of applicant does not come with the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The police having prior information was in a position to comply with provision of section 103, Cr.P.C. Which was overlooked. On all these scores case of applicant looks to be of further enquiry. In Crime No,14 of 2002 the bail is granted to present applicant by the trial Court. In the circumstances the applicant has been able to make out a case for bail.

8. ' Above are the reasons of a short order dated 1-10-2002 granting bail to the present applicant in the sum of Rs,50,000 and a P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of this Court.