' Petitioner lftikhar alias Bodi through the instant petition has sought for post-arrest bail in case F.I.R.
No,549 dated 27-9-2001 under sections 392/411, P.P.C. Registered with Police Station, Batala Colony, District Faisalabad.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as per F.I.R. Is that on the night between 26/27-9-2003 at about 1-30 a.m. The complainant was going to his house in his car. All of a sudden, two unknown persons on Honda 125 CC motorcycle came in front of his car. One of them took out pistol and made fire on the side mirror of the car. The same broke the glass and hit the dashboard. He snatched the handbag from him due to which his right arm was injured. They fled away with the bag. The bag contained pure gold weighing 1019 grams and gold ornaments in the shape of Mala, Kantay, Balian weighing 950 grams worth Rs,14,56,432 and cash amount of Rs,23,000.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it has appeared that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. He has never been put to any identification test. His name for the first time has appeared in the supplementary statement of the complainant recorded on 1-2- 2004 as one of the persons, who have committed the said act. It, thus was after about 5 months of the alleged incident. The question of evidentiary value of such belated supplementary statement of the complainant is open to serious consideration.
4. Admittedly, there is no other evidence against him on the police record regarding the commission of dacoity. It is, therefore, yet to be seen that he if can ultimately be held liable for the offence under section 392, P.P.C. The case against him is therefore, covered within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Calling for further inquiry into his guilt.
5. Allegedly an amount of Rs,5,000 and four gold Kantay have been recovered from him. It attracts maximum an offence under section 411, P.P.C., which does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C.
6. He is statedly behind the bars for the last about 9 months.
7. Learned State counsel on query has not been able to show that if previously he has been involved in any case.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, has submitted that he has neither been involved in any other case nor previously convicted person.
9. In these circumstances, I find that case for his enlargement on bail has been made out.
10. The petition, therefore, is accepted and he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.