2023 Y L R 778
[Balochistan]
Before Zaheer- ud-Din Kakar and Muhammad Aamir Nawaz Rana, JJ
AJAB KHAN and 3 others ---Applicants
Versus
The STATE--- Respondent
Criminal Bail Application No. 89 of 2022, decided on 11th August, 2022.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) ---
----S. 497 ---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 386, 392, 506 & 34--- Anti-Terrorism Act
(XXVII of 1997), S. 7--- Theft after preparation made for causing death, hurt or restraint,
robbery, criminal intimidation and common intention---Bail, grant of ---Failure to conduct
identification parade--- Effect ---Accused persons were alleged to have snatched the
complainant's vehicle as well as mobile phone and demanded extortion--- Two of the accused
persons were nominated in the FIR while the name of other tw o had surfaced through
supplementary statement that too on the basis of affidavit submitted by the complainant ---No
identification parade was conducted ---Case against later persons fell within the ambit of
further inquiry, as such, they were admitted to ba il while the application to the extent of
nominated accused persons was dismissed.
Riaz Ahmed Soomro for Applicants.
Muhammad Naeem Kakar, Additional Prosecutor General for the State.
Date of hearing: 4th August, 2022.
ORDER
MUHAMMAD AAMIR NAWAZ RANA, J. ---Through this application, the
applicants seek post -arrest bail in case FIR No.10/2022 dated 13.01.2022 Police Station
Saddar Loralai. Earlier bail application filed by the applicants had been rejected by learned
Special Judge, Anti Terrorism Court , Loralai (herein -after "the trial Court") vide order dated
07.07.2022.
2. Succinctly facts of the case are that on 13.01.2022 at 08:20 p.m., FIR No.10/2022
under sections 386, 392, 506(2), 34, P.P.C. read with section 7 of the Anti -Terrorism Act,
1997 was lodged with Police Station Saddar Loralai on the complaint of one Abdul Sattar
son of Yar Muhammad with the averments that the accused Ajab Khan and Behram Khan had demanded extortion money ( ) from him and had threatened him for dire consequences;
that o n the fateful day, when he was going to his home in his V8 vehicle and reached near
Jamal Petrol Pump, the accused Ajab Khan and Behram Khan along with two unknown
persons, armed with Kalashnikovs, intercepted him with Vigo vehicle and snatched his vehicle and mobile phone; that they also demanded extortion money ( ) worth 20 million
from him.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants mainly contended that the applicants are innocent
and have falsely been implicated in the instant case; that the allegation of demand of extortion money ( ) is false and fabricated; that the witnesses mentioned in the FIR are close relatives of the complainant.
Learned counsel further stated that apart from the above, the case is of further inquiry
as there exists civil dispute be tween the parties, therefore the applicants are entitled for grant
of bail.
4. On the contrary, learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the State mainly
opposed the request of learned counsel for the applicants for grant of bail with the contentions t hat since applicants Nos.1 and 2 have specifically been nominated in the FIR
and the stolen vehicle has also been recovered from the possession of applicants Nos.1 and 2, therefore the applicants are not entitled for concession of bail.
Arguments heard. R ecord perused.
5. As per contents of FIR, the incident took place on 13.01.2022 at about 10:25 am,
while FIR was lodged on the same date at 08:20 pm. The applicants Nos.1 and 2 have
specifically been nominated in the FIR and allegation of demand of extorti on money ( ) has
been levelled against them which is a scheduled offence under the Anti -Terrorism Act, 1997.
Learned counsel for the applicants has made effort to persuade us to appreciate the
intrinsic value of the available material in depth which exercise in view of precedent set by this Court as well as by the Hon'ble Supreme Court should be avoided at bail stage. The applicants Nos.1 and 2 have not been able to make out a case for grant of bail after arrest, whereas, on the same touchstone, the case of applicant Nos.3 and 4 has been considered and it transpires that the applicants Nos.3 and 4 are not nominated in the FIR and on 14.01.2022 through supplementary statement, their names were surfaced that too on the basis of affidavit submitted by the comp lainant. As per record, no identification parade was conducted so
without further dilating upon merits of the case, we are of the opinion that to the extent of applicant Nos.3 and 4, the case of further inquiry within the ambit of section 497(2), Cr.P.C has been made out.
On the basis of tentative assessment of the material available before us, the
application to the extent of applicants Nos.1 and 2 i.e. Ajab Khan and Behram Khan is dismissed, whereas the application to the extent of applicant Nos.3 and 4 is accepted and applicant Nos.3 and 4 i.e. Amanullah son of Abdul Manan and Naseebullah son of Juma
Khan are admitted to bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.500,000/ - (Rupees
five hundred thousand only) each with PR bond of the like amount to the satisfaction of
Additional Registrar of this Court or trial Court.
The observations given above are tentative in nature and same shall not influence the
merits of case pending trial, which has to be decided on its own merits.
SA/138/Bal. Order accordingly.This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error,
let us know.