' This is bail after arrest application in case F.I.R. No.252, dated 27-6-2002, under sections 392/382, P.P.C. Of Police Station City Depalpur, District Okara.
2. According to prosecution allegations on 27-6-2002 different leases were auctioned in the premises of Tehsil Municipal Administration Depalpur, and total amount of Rs.4,90,000 was received from bidders and to deposit the same by Malik Allah Ditta complainant, Accountant. Tehsil Municipal Administration, Depalpur, along with Naeem Ahmad, Account Clerk, proceeded to the National Bank of Pakistan, Depalpur, and when they reached near the gate of T.M. Office, four armed culprits snatched the said amount and fled away in a car. The case was investigated with different police officers, but the culprits could not be traced out. On 24-8-2003, the present petitioners were arrested by the ladies police, Race Course Police Station, Lahore, in case F.I.R.
No.64, dated 24-8-2003, under sections 489/420, P.P.C. And during investigations they disclosed that they had committed the said occurrence along with one Kashi and they also led to the recovery of Rs.45,000 each total amounting to Rs.90,000. Race Course Police then intimated about the said factum to Police Station City Depalpur and consequently Rustam Ali S.I. Of the said police station got the petitioners transferred from Lahore to Depalpur and then they were sent to Central Jail, Sahiwal, for identification Prade in which they both were allegedly identified by the complainant and Naeem Ahmad, Account Clerk, P.W.
3. It has been argued on behalf of the petitioners that in the F.I.R. The features of the culprits had not been indicated and that the alleged admission of the petitioners before the ladies police, Race Course, Lahore, that they had committed the said occurrence is inadmissible in evidence and the recovery of Rs.90,000 allegedly made from both the petitioners in consequence thereof will not constitute a legal material to link the petitioners with the occurrence and that both the petitioners on their transfer to Depalpur Police Station had been shown to the complainant and the P.W. And at the time of identification parade whichwas held on 11-9-2003. The petitioners had raised said objection before the Magistrate which had been recorded in the proceedings and thus the identification of the petitioners by the said P.Ws. Is not of much substance and that the petitioners are in jail for the last almost 8 months and there is no substantial material to link them with the occurrence and as such they are entitled to the concession of bail.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant and as well as State have vehemently opposed the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners by arguing that the petitioners had led to the recovery of Rs.90,000 and that they were identified by the complainant and the P.W. In the identification parade held on 11-9-2003, who had no malice or enmity against them and that mere objection of the petitioners before the Magistrate that they had been shown to the P.Ws. Will not be sufficient to discard the identification parade proceedings.
5. In the F.I.R., the features of the culprits who had allegedly snatched cash amount from the complainant have not been mentioned. Admittedly, both the petitioners were arrested in another case by the ladies police, Race Course, Lahore, on 24-8-2003 and whatever they had confessed or revealed before the police would be inadmissible in evidence being confession before the police. In the F.I.R. The denomination and numbers of the cash amount which had been snatched has not been given. Therefore, prima facie, the recovery of Rs.90,000 allegedly made from both the accused also does not link them with the stolen cash. The petitioners were got transferred from Lahore to Depalpur and then on the next day, they were sent to the jail for holding of identification parade, where the complainant and Naeem Ahmad, P.Ws. Had allegedly identified them on 11-9- 2003. The Magistrate who held the identification parade had recorded the objection of the petitioners that when they were transferred from Lahore to Depalpur, Naeem Ahmad P.W. Was also with them and they had taken meal together and at Police Station City Depalpur, they were shown to the P.Ws., who remained with them at the police station and their photographs were also taken.
These facts, prima facie, make the proceedings of the identification parade a matter of further inquiry. There is no other tangible material against the petitioners. Therefore, in my view, their case appears to be a matter of further inquiry and as such, they are admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.